A DESERTIFICATION
INDICATOR SYSTEM FOR
MEDITERRANEAN EUROPE
Jane Brandt, King’s College London, UK
Nichola Geeson, King’s College London, UK
Anton Imeson, 3D Environmental Change, The Netherlands
with specialist contributions from:
Agostino Ferrara, Universitá della Basilicata, Italy
Mike Kirkby and Brian Irvine, University of Leeds, UK
Costas Kosmas, Agricultural University of Athens, Greece
Leopoldo Rojo Serrano, DGCONA, Madrid
Giovanni Quaranta, Monica Caggiano, Rosanna Salvia, Universitá
della Basilicata, Italy
Francesco López Bermúdez, Gonzalo Gonzales Barberá, Jorge García
Gómez, Universidad de Murcia, Spain
Maria José Roxo, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugual
Giuseppe Enne and Claudio Zucca, NRD, Universitá degli Studi di
Sassari, Sardinia
Stefan Sommer, EC-JRC, Ispra, Italy
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research reported here is being carried out in the context of DESERTLINKS
(Combating Desertification in Mediterranean Europe: Linking Science with Stakeholders),
– a European Commission-funded research project (DG-Research: Contract No. EVK2CT-2001-00109).
Jane Brandt and Nichola Geeson are Coordinators of the DESERTLINKS Project.
Anton Imeson is a scientific advisor of the DESERTLINKS Project.
Visit the project web site: www.kcl.ac.uk/desertlinks
or email us: [email protected]
3
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface
7
Introduction
9
The development of a desertification indicator system for Mediterranean
Europe within the context of other indicator systems
Relationships with other indicator systems
Principal conclusions of the review
Highlighted features of the indicator system
11
11
14
16
What concerns people about desertification in Mediterranean Europe?
Identification of problems and issues
Simplifying and organising desertification issues
17
17
20
Desertification indicators for Mediterranean Europe
Candidate indicators: identifying winners
23
23
Building a desertification indicator system for Mediterranean Europe
The framework
Indicator Data Base
Indicators of relevance to particular issues
Inclusion of indicators at coarser spatial scales
Using the indicator system for online calculation of desertification risk
Making the indicator system relevant to both desertification
and end-users
27
27
27
29
30
32
Conclusions and future developments
37
List of Acronyms
39
Appendix 1: The problems and issues associated with Mediterranean desertification
41
Appendix 2: Reports to the Second MEDRAP workshop
47
Appendix 3: Desertification enquiry made of the general public
51
Appendix 4: Problems or signs of desertification identified by local stakeholders
53
Appendix 5: List of desertification related issues affecting Mediterranean Europe
57
Appendix 6: The indicator Data Base classification framework
69
Appendix 7: Mapping land degradation risk in the Mediterranean at a
European scale
71
Appendix 8: Indicators from remote sensing
75
Appendix 9: Expert system for evaluating the environmental sensitivity
index for a local area
77
5
35
6
PREFACE
1
Who's this
book for?
A Desertification Indicator System is being developed for Mediterranean Europe. This
document explains how this is being done and how you can contribute to its future
development into a tool that can be of use to you. During the next year we will have the
opportunity of testing and refining it with scientists, stakeholders and the Focal Points of
the Annex IV countries, before the final version is produced. Although the Desertification
Indicator System is being developed and tested in southern Europe, the System and many
of the indicators can be adapted for combating desertification world-wide.
What's in this
book?
In the first part of this booklet, we describe how we have reviewed different indicator
systems. In order to identify the most important elements that it should contain. Next, the
desertification problems and issues affecting Mediterranean Europe are described. The first
task was actually to identify what these issues are from a wide range of sources. The issues
were then classified into a broad range of themes. Through various stakeholder
consultations we have actually identified the concerns, interests and even the emotions
that desertification is producing and we have demonstrated how these vary across
Europe. In parallel potential indicators for the Indicator System were identified, again
from a wide range of sources and also at different scales. These were then matched with
the above mentioned concerns.
CD ROM
Prototype
A prototype of the Desertification Indicator System for Mediterranean Europe is included
on the accompanying CD-ROM. This will become a web-based interactive system
available to everyone by the end of the DESERTLINKS Project. It has been designed to
meet the needs of a wide variety of end-user. It could be someone just seeking
information about relevant indicators, or they may wish to view a list of possible
indicators to see which ones they may have the data available for. There is information
on indicators in relation to specific land uses, and tools to calculate desertification risk. An
expert system with pull-down menus can be used to evaluate an Environmental Sensitivity
Index for a local area. Feedback from users consulted within the project will ensure that
this Indicator System really does link science with stakeholders.
This version of the system is only a prototype and it is intended to help the reader
interact with us in order that we can produce a system that can help all stakeholders gain
the information they need. Please give us your feedback and become a partner in this
process. In 18 months time we look forward to sending you the improved and completed
product that you can use in your efforts to combat desertification. Writing and editing all
of the indicator descriptions is a major ongoing task and this has only just started. Advice ,
suggestions or assistance from the reader would be welcome.
Finally, for those who are interested in the technical details some technical chapters
describing elements of the methodology have been included in Appendices.
June 2003
1
Photograph from Mike Kirkby
7
8
INTRODUCTION
2
Requirement
to develop
indicators
The UNCCD have adopted a strategy for combating desertification that requires affected
countries to develop monitoring techniques as part of national and regional action
programmes involving all stakeholders. They identified desertification indicators as a
necessary tool for both management and monitoring.
The Northern Mediterranean (Annex IV) countries are still searching for a common
methodology for identifying and using such indicators that will enable them to meet
these commitments and our goal is to be able to support them with this task.
Each Annex IV country has already been selecting and mapping desertification
indicators. National maps of desertification risk based on different combinations of
indexes of climate, soils and vegetation have been produced. In undertaking this work,
all of the countries have faced similar problems of co-ordination of information and of
knowing how to resolve the inherent problems of uncertainty. To work at more
detailed local scales they are using information that is generally available and which
usually includes: population density; rock fragments; soil depth; slope; rainfall; aridity;
fire risk; erosion protection; drought resistance; plant cover; employment index; old age
index; aridity index; rain erosivity; drought index; urban sprawl; infiltration capacity;
stability of the surface horizon; grazing intensity. (Enne and Zucca3).
In order to develop the indicator system, these preliminary steps needed to be taken:
•
an analysis of desertification problems and issues affecting Mediterranean Europe.
•
assembly of lists of potential desertification indicators
The results of these two steps are presented in this document.
Common set
of indicators
for Europe
We are producing a common set of desertification indicators that can be used, within a
Desertification Indicator System for Mediterranean Europe. As already mentioned the
ultimate goal is to provide a tool to enable users from a wide range of backgrounds,
including scientists, policy makers and farmers, to identify where desertification is a
problem and how critical the problem is, to better understand the processes of
desertification as they are affected, and to find ways of mitigating the problems
identified.
We hope that you will realise that this is not just another booklet on indicators. The
material being presented deserves special consideration because:
Photograph of almond cultivation in the Guadalentín, Spain by Jorge Garcia Gomez
Enne, G. and Zucca, C. 2000. Desertification indicators for the European Mediterranean region: state of
the art and possible methodological approaches. ANPA, Roma and NRD, Sassari, 261 p
2
3
9
•
•
•
The bottom
line
It is not just a proposed indicator methodology. It is based on real data and
information and it provides scientifically underpinned information.
The methodology will be genuinely equitable, providing all who seek
information with unbiased and relevant answers.
It will provide a platform on which all of those interested can improve and
develop tools for combating desertification.
Desertification is really about the sustainable management of our natural resources. It is
not just a matter of land use or development policy, it is also a matter of understanding
and enlightenment. We hope that our desertification system will become a platform for
exchanging and developing a deeper understanding regarding the future policies that we
should pursue.
10
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
DESERTIFICATION INDICATOR
SYSTEM FOR MEDITERRANEAN
EUROPE WITHIN THE CONTEXT
OF OTHER INDICATOR
SYSTEMS
Relationships with
other indicator systems
Indicators are already widely used by governments to set
targets for and to monitor a wide variety of things such as
health, education and quality of life. Indicators derived
from the results of research can also be used to simplify
complex
phenomena,
making
scientific
research
understandable by the general population.
Our strategy
The desertification indicator system that we are developing needs to be related by the
reader to existing practice. The objective of this chapter is to explain this. One way is to
explain our approach is as conceptually holistic and systems-based. A holistic approach
means that we can offer tailor–made indicators that can be matched with the experience
and concerns of the enquirer at all levels of scale. According to ability and data
availability we aim to help guide enquirers to the information and indicators they need.
In effect, the indicator system then becomes an expert system for desertification. It is
available to everyone.
Earlier work
that sets the
scene in
Europe
There are various lists of environmental indicators in existence, and some of these. have
been developed into Indicator Systems, where indicators are grouped for different
purposes. There are different methods for classifying indicators and the most commonly
used alternatives are incorporated into the prototype system. Unfortunately most
indicators are conceptual, they are not operationalised. Although there is a wide variety
of indicator lists available, few Indicator Systems are actually being used to test and
amend indicators using real data in a variety of situations.
OECD
The Organisation for Economical Cooperation and Development (OECD)4 began to
assemble ideas about agri-environmental indicators in the early nineties, based on a
pressure - state – response (PSR) model for indicator classification. They have also
suggested criteria for accepting indicators as useful: indicators should be specific,
measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. As well as compiling lists of
indicators the OECD have circulated questionnaires on their usefulness to OECD member
countries, set up data bases and hosted expert meetings to discuss specific categories of
indicator.
Environental
Information
and
Observation
Network
The European Environment Agency includes the European Topic Centre on Terrestrial
Environment and the Environmental Information and Observation Network (EIONET)5
whose main objective is to develop indicators relevant to environmental policies in
Europe. There is a preliminary list of about 400 indicators from which a shorter list will
4 Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, Volume 3: Methods and Results, OECD, Paris March 2001.
www.oecd.org/agr/env/indicators.htm
5 European Topic Centre on Terrestrial Environment http://terrestrial.eionet.eu.int/Indicators
11
be selected and validated, and finally implemented. It was the EEA who introduced the
DPSIR6 system of indicator classification, in turn developed from the OECD’s PSR model.
DPSIR can be used to describe interactions between different types of indicators and also
observe feedback loops. The EEA have a list of published indicators7, (revised to April
20038) related to themes and policy issues. They are seeking to integrate the indicators
and reduce the total number. They are also distinguishing between short, medium and
long term indicators. Some of the indicators on the list are vague and difficult to
measure and compare, e.g. “protection of grasslands”. Although all the indicators are
related to problems in the terrestrial environment not many can be related directly to
desertification. An integrated information framework is now being developed, relating
indicator sets to environmental issues/sectors and providing fact sheets for each
indicator, along similar lines to the DESERTLINKS System. The EEA are attempting to
address the problems of data collection and transfer, with special focus on collecting
data to serve more than one policy objective.
Indicator Report
on the
Integrated
Environmental
concerns into
Agricultural
Policy
The EEA are also collaborating in the IRENA Project9 (Indicator Report on the Integrated
Environmental Concerns into Agricultural policy) with the JRC (Joint Research Centre,
DG Environment and DG Eurostat). The objectives are to compile a set of agrienvironmental indicators, develop data sets to match the indicators for regional
analyses, and to use the indicators to assess the integration of environmental and
agricultural policies. Trends in space and time will be monitored and mapped using GIS.
The list of 35 indicators10 includes some similar to those being used in the DESERTLINKS
System.
Towards
European
Pressure
Indicators
A European System of Environmental Pressure Indicators has been developed by the
TEPI 11project (Towards European Pressure Indicators) in association with EUROSTAT.
The main aims are to determine six priority pressure indicators in the environmental
fields of air pollution, climate change, loss of biodiversity, water pollution, etc. that can
be used by all the EU member states. Lack of data from the different countries and lack
of access to existing data are the main problems.
Land
Degradation
Assessment of
Drylands
One of the most comprehensive lists of possible indicators has been proposed by the
Land Degradation Assessment of Drylands (LADA12). This project aims to develop a
standardised methodological framework for assessment of land degradation causes.
Recognising that it is crucial to address the needs of stakeholders, the project carried out
an email conference in October/November 2002 to which all interested parties could
respond. The draft paper: “Some suggested indicators for land degradation assessment
of drylands” 13 includes some useful definitions of criteria for indicators, and also a clear
explanation of the uses of the DPSIR system. LADA expects users to choose the best
indicators from their lists for their own purposes, but has not yet listed key indicators for
common purposes, or tested them in pilot areas.
Driving force, Pressure, State, Impact, Response
European Environment Agency http://themes.eea.eu.int/all_indicators_box
8 EEA core set of indicators.pdf (revised version, April 2003)
9 IRENA Project. http://gi-gis.jrc.it/agrienv.html
10 Brussels, 15.01.2001. COM 2001(144). COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE
COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. Statistical Information needed for Indicators to monitor
the Integration of Environmental concerns into the Common Agricultural Policy.
11 http://www.e-m-a-i-l.nu/tepi
12 LADA, the Dryland Land Degradation Assessment, http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/lada/
13 ftp:ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/ladadocs/paper_281102.doc
6
7
12
ELISA
Agri- Environmental indicators for sustainable agriculture in Europe have been
developed by the European Centre for Nature Conservation (ECNC) in a project named
ELISA. A team of experts and policy analysts in the fields of agriculture and environment
produced a detailed report1415 describing the concepts, issues and indicators. The report
focuses on state and driving force indicators. Twenty-two state indicators cover the
three media of the soil, water and air. The driving force indicators cover land use
intensity, nutrients and pesticides. The four soil indicators (water erosion, wind erosion,
soil compaction and pesticides in the soils) are all appropriate to desertification.
Proposal on
Agrienvironment
al Indicators
A more recent project is the Proposal on agri-environmental indicators (PAIS)16 which is
following three indicator themes: landscapes, agricultural practices and rural
development. Indicators are listed according to issues within these themes but are not
classified in any other way. Some indicators, such as “% population aged 65 or over”,
(relevant to abandonment of agricultural land) are easy to understand and measure, and
also appear in the DESERTLINKS System. Other indicators such as “willingness to pay for
provision of agricultural landscapes or landscape features” are interesting ideas but are
not defined in a measurable way.
Commission
on
Sustainable
Development
In 2001, the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) published
the results of its five-year Work Programme to translate physical and social science
knowledge about sustainable development into manageable units of information, into
sustainable development indicators. During this time they developed a working list of
134 potential indicators, tested them in 22 different countries, and finally identified a
short list of 58 core indicators which they recommend be used across the world as a
common base for monitoring and reporting on sustainable development.
International
Institute for
Sustainable
Development
The International Institute for Sustainable Development (iisd)17has been working on
measurements and indicators of sustainable development since 1995. They have
designed the Dashboard of Sustainability that is an internet tool providing information
and analysis for a wide range of users from experts to the general public.
There are also desertification indicators and systems available from many other
organisations world-wide, that are not reviewed here. All the groups, developing and
using environmentally-related indicators, can offer valuable experience to those working
on desertification indicators. Many ideas can be obtained from the many indicator
concepts and systems developed by agencies and institutions such as the EPA for
monitoring the state and vulnerability of ecosystems; the world bank concerned with
land quality indicators; organisations working on sustainable forestry, marine ecosystems
and urban development; and from the parallel conventions developing indicators for
biodiversity and climate change impact.
DESERTLINKS is seeking to use indicators with widespread acceptance, suggested in
other European and world-wide systems, wherever possible.
http://www.ecnc.nl/doc/ecnc/publicat/elisa.html
Wascher, D.M. 2000 (ed) Agri-environmental indicators for sustainable agriculture in Europe. Tilburg:
European Centre for Nature Conservation, 240pp. ISBN: 90-76762-02-3
16 http:www.landsis.lu/projects/download/PAIS%20Summary.pdf
17 http://www.iisd.org/measure/
14
15
13
Principal conclusions of
the review
The review of contemporary indicator lists and systems
has been used to identify the full range of information
required to make our system as comprehensive as
possible.
Top down
versus
bottom-up
approaches
In contrast to the top down approach taken by the CSD (Commission on Sustainable
Development), the UNCCD's Committee on Science and Technology has not taken the
lead in coordinating the development of a global working list of desertification
indicators and then coordinating the testing by individual countries. Instead, following
more general guidelines from the CST18, countries and organisations within each Annex
are collaborating in developing their own indicators, with additional emphasis being
placed on identifying and using indicators which are relevant to the concerns of local
people, rather than solely to the strategies of national government. The LADA indicators
have also been collected with active stakeholder participation. We recognise the need to
integrate both of these approaches
Indicator
descriptions
A format very similar to the standardised format for describing the indicators used by
the CSD (Commission on Sustainable Development) has been previously been proposed
for use with desertification indicators (see Enne and Zucca19) and this has been followed
here. In the first instance emphasis has been put be on the use of single parameter
indicators (such as annual rainfall (mm)), so that a clear distinction can be made
between these and indicators aggregated to form indices (such as an aridity index which
combines rainfall and temperature). The EEA are also adding fact sheets for each of their
indicators, including broad policy implications.
Indicator
frameworks
It is interesting to note that, although the CSD started to organise its indicators according
to the widely used driving force-state-response framework, they later revised the
framework to one based on four dimensions (social, environmental, economic and
institutional), sub divided into fifteen themes (for example the environmental themes
are atmosphere, land, oceans, seas and coasts, fresh water and biodiversity) and 38 subthemes. It was felt by those who tested the indicators that this better reflected the main
issues in sustainable development, and made the indicators easier to use. Similarly,
although LADA does include reference to DPSIR the main framework for classification is
based on scale (global, national, village and farm), and whether the indicators are biophysical, socio-economic or institutional.
Testing and
reporting
For many proposed indicator systems testing is ongoing and the results are not yet
reported (e.g. EEA, LADA). In testing their working list of indicators, the CSD defined a
standard methodology to be used. They also specified the format in which the reports of
the testing were to be made. The same approach will be taken with the testing of
desertification indicators by the national Focal Points in so that the indicators can be
effectively evaluated.
A real difficulty is the lack of quantitative data available to monitor environmental
change in Europe. Nowhere in Europe are there long term measurements of indicators
comparable to those available in the USA. European scientific policy has placed more
Intergovernmental Negotiation Committee for the Convention to Combat Desertification. 1997. Report
on ongoing work being done on benchmarks and indicators1997 (A/AC.241/INF.4)
http://www.unccd.int/cop/officialdocs/incd10/doclist.php
19 Enne, G. and Zucca, C. 2000. Desertification indicators for the European Mediterranean region: state of
the art and possible methodological approaches. ANPA, Roma and NRD, Sassari, 261 pp
18
14
reliance on modelling and remote sensing and there is a scarcity of ground based data.
Nevertheless data is sometimes available from pilot areas that have been the subject of
in-depth investigations. The approach must therefore be to scientifically validate and
underpin indicators in the few data rich sites that are available.
Relation of
indicators to
policy
objectives and
data availability
Even when there are data, a list of indicators remains only a list unless it is related to
specific purposes and policy objectives. The indicators may then be adapted to answer
specific questions that arise.
In its "Supplementary report on work on benchmarks and indicators" presented at COP
120 the CST proposed that the objectives to be considered are: global objectives (combat
desertification, mitigate the effects of drought, contribute to achievement of sustainable
development); contributing objectives (improve land productivity; rehabilitate, improve
and manage sustainable land and water resources; improve living conditions at the
community level); and specific objectives (as defined by the National Action
Programmes).
LADA21 have recognised that indicators will only be useful if the required data is already
available or is easy to collect. They therefore provide details of national and subnational data bases where they exist. LADA are also identifying indicators that act as a
proxy for other variables. In DESERTLINKS some socio-economic indicators relevant to
soil properties have already been recognised and advocated22.
Use of
common
"headline"
indicators
Aggregation
of indicators
into indices
A core set of perhaps around 15 "headline" indicators23, is needed for regular reporting
and for which targets could be set. If all the Mediterranean countries were to agree on
and adopt the same headline desertification indicators, they would be a common tool
for monitoring and reporting desertification. Attention should also be paid to indicators
that are of particular use at the local as well as the national level. The top three headline
indicators chosen for sustainable development are GDP (and GDP per head), total and
social investment as a percentage of GDP, and percentage of people of working age
who are in work. These indicators are of course also useful in relation to desertification.
Headline indicators are being identified in two ways. First there are indicators already in
widespread use in the countries of Annex IV, and then there are additional indicators
selected to further enhance a common approach throughout Annex IV.
It is important that integrating and aggregating indicators be taken into account. This is a
weak link in all systems. The aggregation of indicators according to the structure of the
framework is a logical one which should be followed in desertification too. Progress in
this area within sustainable development will continue to be monitored.
20 United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, 1997. Supplementary report on work on
benchmarks and indicators. ICCD/COP(1)/CST/3/Add.1
http://www.unccd.int/cop/officialdocs/cop1/doclist.php#cst
21 LADA, the Dryland Land Degradation Assessment, http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/lada/
22 Geeson N, Quaranta G and Salvia R. 2003. A participatory approach to identifying economic indicators
related to soil biodiversity: empirical evidence from the northern Mediterranean countries. OECD expert
meeting on soil erosion and soil biodiversity indicators. Rome, March 2003.
23 UK Government Sustainable Development. www.sustainabledevelopment.gov.uk/indicators/headline/framework.htm
15
Highlighted features of
the Indicator System
Strategy
Both the policy principle of the UNCCD to develop
indicators from the bottom-up, in participation with the
local stakeholders, and the indicator systems already being
used and developed for other environmental issues have
been taken into account in developing the indicator
strategy.
The most important elements of the methodology are:
•
All indicator descriptions are standardised, the format being similar to that used by
the CSD, and published by the NRD and the Italian Environment Protection
Agency.
•
The system is capable of evolution as the issues evolve and new indicators can be
added and redundant ones removed.
•
Indicators have been used which are common to other systems where appropriate.
•
The information in the system can be interrogated in a number of ways, for
example indicators can be selected according to a DPSIR framework or a dimension
framework.
•
Indicators can be identified according to their relevance to particular problems or
issues that have been identified and defined by national and local stakeholders.
•
Relevant headline indicators for routine monitoring have been suggested for each
of the principal issues.
•
Indicators for different spatial scales and time scales are included.
•
Indicator have been related to specific objectives in the National Action
Programmes
•
The importance of indicators in the system have been evaluated in a number of
contexts, e.g. for different land uses.
•
Indicators should be described in a quantitative way if possible so that different
areas can be compared according to benchmarks or whether values for a variable
fall within a comparable range. Some careful qualitative descriptions can also be
used in this way.
•
The usefulness of indicators may rely on data availability. Sometimes, if direct data
is difficult to obtain, it may be beneficial to use a proxy indicator.
•
It is possible for the user to calculate "Desertification risk", using an aggregate index
(Environmental Sensitivity Index, ESI) combining the most relevant indicators, for a
wide range of specific situations.
16
WHAT CONCERNS
PEOPLE ABOUT
DESERTIFICATION IN
MEDITERRANEAN
EUROPE?
24
Identification of
problems and issues
Finding out
what people
think
Source
material
The issues, problems and solutions associated with
desertification form the framework of the Indicator
System. The range and type of issues vary depending on
the administrative level being considered. For example
rainfall and aridity may be important nationally, but
locally issues of land use change may be perceived as
more important.
The main achievement of this work is that it show very
important differences in Europe that that the Regional
Action Plan must address.
Finding out what people think about desertification in Europe was a first step in
identifying the issues that needed to be addressed by the indicator system Obviously,
depending on the point of view of the stakeholder, different issues have different
priorities. This was done top-down, by looking at published UNCCD documents and
bottom-up by consulting people on the ground. Consequently, to take account of the
wide range of perceptions of desertification issues, a review was conducted of all the
statements of desertification issues that have been expressed by the UNCCD, the
National Focal points,2526 environmental managers, local land users and stakeholders
and the general public.
Full reviews and references for source documents are given in Appendices 1-4.
•
Appendix 1: National Action Plans for Portugal, Italy and Greece27. The First and
Second National Reports on the Implementation of the UNCCD, 2000 and 2002.
•
Appendix 2: Reports of the National Committees to Combat Desertification to the
Second MEDRAP28 workshop "Identification of Sensitive Areas", Tróia, Portugal, 6
to 8 June 2002
•
Appendix 3: DESERTLINKS Reports from participatory workshops on the
perceptions of local stakeholders of the problem of desertification.
•
Appendix 4: DESERTLINKS "Desertification Enquiry" made of the general public
Irrigated agriculture in the Guadalentín, Spain, photo by Claudio Zucca
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. 1994. The Convention to Combat Desertification.
http://unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/northmed.php
26 National Report on the implementation of the convention to combat desertification in Spain. April 2002.
Il informe sobre el programa de accion nacional contra la desertification.
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2002/spain-spa.pdf
27 http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/national/2001/greece-eng.pdf
http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/national/2000/italy-eng.pdf
http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/national/2000/portugal-eng.pdf
28 MEDRAP : Concerted Action to support the northern Mediterranean regional action programme to
combat desertification. http://www.uniss.it/nrd/medrap
24
25
17
General
Mediterraneanwide concerns
In the text of its convention, the UNCCD broadly identifies the principal, worldwide
problems caused by desertification as: loss of biological productivity, loss of economic
productivity, and loss of complexity in the landscape29. The principal, worldwide
problems caused by desertification are identified by the UNCCD as:
•
loss of biological productivity
•
loss of economic productivity
•
loss of complexity in landscape (i.e. rainfed cropland, irrigated cropland, range,
pasture, forest and woodland)
In Annex IV, the text further describes desertification in Mediterranean Europe as being
mainly driven by human activities, such as intensive agriculture, overgrazing,
deforestation and changes in local population, in combination with adverse physical
environmental conditions. The particular issues the UNCCD identifies in the
Mediterranean region are: high rainfall variability; poor, highly erodible soils; steep
slopes; forest loss from fire; land abandonment; deterioration of soil and water
conservation structures; unsustainable exploitation of water resources; and
concentration of economic activity and irrigated agriculture in the coast.
In its Supporting Information Report (2001)30, GMES provides a further overview of
Mediterranean desertification by stating that "in EU countries affected by desertification,
agriculture concentrates on the most productive areas, while former marginal lands are
being afforested, used as grazing grounds or wild areas. The implication of this is that
desertification occurs under three conditions (i) in areas where the concentration of
people and investment risks over-exploitation of natural resources, (ii) along the
boundaries of marginal lands, where expansion or contraction of the neighbouring
agriculture often causes land degradation, (iii) in areas formerly affected by
desertification processes that are no more active, but which have left behind degraded
land often in an irreversible condition."
More specific
concerns in
individual
countries
Portugal
While a long-term common cultural heritage and, more recently, membership of the
European Union have placed similar desertification pressures on Mediterranean Europe,
the complexity of the landscape and societies gives rise to a wide range of
desertification-related issues. Each of the northern Mediterranean countries has its own
particular view of the problem of desertification and how the Convention to Combat
Desertification should be implemented. Similarly those living in desertified areas identify
a variety of issues affecting them locally.
The National Action Programme for Portugal31 describes desertification affecting the
eastern and southern interior of the country. Here it is possible to observe rapid soil
erosion, increased salinity of soils, an increase of surface run-off due to the reduction of
soil water retention, a reduction in the diversity of species and a reduction in
productivity leading to impoverishment of the human communities dependent on these
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. 1994. The Convention to Combat Desertification.
http://www.unccd.int/convention/menu.php
30 GMES, 2001. Combating Desertification: requirements briefing. Global monitoring for environment and
security working groups, version 2.0, 26 April 2001. http://gmes.jrc.it Supporting Information
29
National Action Plan to Combat Desertification – 17 June 1999
http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/northmed.php/portugal-en.pdf
Portugal – Summary of National Report 2000
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/northmed.ph/portugal-summary-eng.pdf
National Report on the implementation of the convention to combat desertification in Portugal. April
2002. http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/northmed.php/portugal-en.pdf
31
18
ecosystems. Many of these are consequences of historical practice of intensive cereal
cultivation exacerbated by the occurrence of intense rainfall over short time periods.
This environmental degradation has led to large scale depopulation as agricultural
productivity decreased, leaving large areas abandoned and subject to fire or landslides.
The remaining rural population is ageing and the desertified areas are not attracting
inward investment or governmental support.
Local stakeholders recognise the fact that their land is degraded, not producing an
adequate income and that as a result of depopulation the population is ageing. They
also recognise that the agricultural techniques they are using are inadequate for the
situation they are in but that agricultural policies are also compounding the problems.
Spain
In Spain32 two types of desertification are distinguished in the National Action
Programme: inherited or relict desertification, and current desertification. Relict
desertification has resulted from an expansion and subsequent failure of agriculture into
rangelands and marginal areas in the first half of the twentieth century. The principal
scenarios of desertification in Spain include: woody crops affected by soil erosion,
extensive dry farming with the risk of erosion, agro-sylvicultural and pastoral systems
affected by overgrazing, agronomic irrigator systems subject to desertification processes,
degraded scrubland and rangeland.
There was a dramatic growth of the rural population in response to a cereal selfsufficiency policy. Current desertification is also related to over-exploitation of soil and
water resources, but there are additional socio-economic factors. A major problem is
that farmers may be more interested in recouping their financial investment in their land
than considering sustainability. Current desertification requires relief from stressors, while
relict desertification needs only restoration or possibly no action.
Local stakeholders in the Guadalentín basin in south east Spain recognise that there are
two agricultural systems in their area. There is intensive, high-input, irrigated farming
which is very aggressive in terms of its impact on the environment and there is dry
farming on the more steeply soils. As the irrigation cultures spread further into areas
previously dry farmed it is perceived that insufficient protection is given to soil and
water resources and that the land is being degraded and water quantity and quality
reduced. In contrast to irrigated areas, dry farming is economically unviable and land is
being depopulated and abandoned.
Italy
Southern Italy33, including the islands, is considered to be affected by desertification
which results from climatic stresses and pressure from non-sustainable human activities.
There are a number of key factors: (i) the abandonment of marginal lands and of
historical settlements due to migration, especially increasing the risk of desertification in
the poorest regions; (ii) the overexploitation of underground water for irrigation
National Report on the implementation of the convention to combat desertification in Spain. April 2000.
Il informe sobre el programa de accion nacional contra la desertification.
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/northmed.php/spain-spa.pdf
33 National Action Programme to combat drought and desertification, Rome, December 1999
http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/northmed.php/italy-eng.pdf OK
National Report of Italy on the Implementation of the UNCCD, 2000
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2000/italy-eng.pdf
http://www.desertification.it/doc/nationalreport.htm
Committee for the review of the implementation of the convention. Second reporting process on UNCCD
implementation. Italy National Report, April 30 2002.
http://unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2002/italy-eng.pdf
32
19
purposes in coastal areas which is causing salinisation; (iii) accelerated soil erosion caused
particularly by forest fires, extreme precipitation on steep slopes and over grazing; (iv)
depletion of soil organic matter content; and (v) the loss of economic productivity of
traditional agriculture and the lack of new policies to counterbalance effects of market
globalisation.
In the Basilicata region of southern Italy, the local stakeholders recognised the
impoverishment and degradation of their natural resources, a decrease in productivity
and abandonment of the land. This leads to a reduction of the rural population and the
gradual ageing of those that are left. They see that environmental factors are not
integrated into territorial policies, nor do such policies respond to local conditions.
Greece
The National Action Programme for Greece34 describes desertification as a phenomenon
a which has been gradually affecting the country for about three millennia because of
the over-exploitation of soil, water and vegetation resources. However it has
accelerated over recent years because of the industrialisation of agriculture and the overconsumption of water. On the mainland the eastern areas of the Peloponnese, Sterea
Hellas and Thessaly plus central and southern areas of Macedonia are affected. Central
and eastern Crete and the Aegean Islands are also affected. In the NAP, desertification is
considered very much as a physical process which: limits the rootable soil layer; reduces
water available to plants; and adversely affects the chemical environment of the rootlayer. However measures to combat it will need to be taken in the agricultural, forestry,
faunal, husbandry, water resources and socio-economic sectors. On the Aegean island of
Lesvos, local stakeholders recognised that they were experiencing reductions in water
and soil resources, productivity and farm income and increases in animal feed imports,
fires and land abandonment.
Simplifying and
organising
desertification issues
In the text of the UNCCD, a very broad outline of the
main desertification issues affecting Mediterranean Europe,
and the context in which the issues are relevant, is given.
In their National Action Programmes and Implementation Reports, the Focal Points
have developed this list of issues, highlighting those which are particularly relevant to
their own countries and providing more detail. National and local stakeholders have
added many specific examples of those issues which affect them directly and it is clear
that to local stakeholders the loss of cultural and heritage functions that accompany rural
depopulation is a major concern. A summary list of issues identified by all these groups
and very loosely grouped into common themes is given in the table below. A fuller list is
provided in Appendix 5.
The list reveals a wide spectrum of issues, some of which are common to all four
countries (such as the abandonment of marginally productive land) and some of are
only relevant locally (such as the introduction of wide spread and highly intensive
irrigated farming in south east Spain).
Greek National Action Plan for combating desertification. (Extended Summary), Athens - January 2001.
http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/national/2001/greece-eng.pdf
Greek National Committee for combating desertification: First national report on the implementation of the
United Nations Convention to combat desertification. Athens March 2000. .
http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/northmed.php/greece-eng.pdf
Greek National Committee for combating desertification: Second national report on the implementation of
the United Nations Convention to combat desertification. Athens April 2002.
http://unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2002/greece-eng.pdf
34
20
In an effort to more rigorously structure the issues, ten major themes were distilled from
the list together with a number of sub-themes that reflected the main facets of each.
Although it is possible to synthesis the issues into this relatively small number of types, in
practice the severity and nature of the issues varies enormously with local conditions,
hence the large number of sub-themes.
What people
think: major
European
concerns about
desertification
Theme
Sub-theme
Land abandonment
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Increase in intensive irrigated
agriculture
Deforestation
Littoralisation
Inappropriate dry farming practices
on marginally productive land
Economic activity in desertification
affected areas
climatic conditions
soil conditions
water availability
employment opportunities in agriculture and elsewhere
income from land
changing rural population
availability of alternative choices
wider policies and funding structures
changes in land management
change in vegetation cover
climatic conditions
soil conditions
water availability
income from land
wider policies and funding structures
salinisation of soil
deterioration of water availability
cultivation techniques
climatic conditions
drought tolerance of forest
forest destruction by fire
forest productivity
impact of grazing
role of forest management
wider funding structures
impact of human population
change in erosion risk
employment opportunities in coastal areas
quality of life
income from land
availability of water for irrigation and urban use
role of planning
land use change in the hinterland
income from coastal land
change in cultivation techniques
changing rural population
climate conditions
soil conditions
water availability and quality
fire
land ownership
farm income
cultivation techniques
husbandry
availability of information on best practices
subsidy structure
soil impoverishment
vegetation impoverishment
change in farm income
land abandonment
climatic conditions
ecosystem conditions
benefits and subsidy structure
change in farm income
development of tourism
changing rural population
expansion of use of irrigation
exploitation of natural resources
21
Degradation of the physical
environment
Availability of water resources
Local demography
Institutional organisation to combat
desertification
What next?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
progressive decline in traditional agriculture
development of new activities (apart from irrigated agriculture)
climate conditions
soil conditions
vegetation cover
degradation by fire
changing land use
water availability
population
production methods
control of erosion
soil erosion
agricultural productivity
biodiversity
salinisation
climate conditions
soil conditions
changes in land use
increase in urban water use
increase in irrigated agriculture
wider policy and subsidy structure
intensification of agriculture
quantity and quality of water reserves
flooding frequency
farm income
age and education structure of rural population
changing agricultural system
opportunities outside agriculture
littoralisation and urbanisation
national assessment of desertification risk
national policy and strategy framework
local capacity for combating desertification
local use of best practices
With the most common and relevant issues of Mediterranean desertification thus
defined, it is possible to select both headline indicators which can directly monitor
trends in a particular issue and a mix of other indicators relevant to the sub-themes. The
initial candidate desertification indicator list and their development into operational
indicators are discussed in the following sections.
22
DESERTIFICATION
INDICATORS FOR
MEDITERRANEAN
EUROPE
35
Candidate indicators:
Identifying winners
Within the world-wide ambit of the UNCCD a range of
desertification indicators have been developed and used,
according to local issues and objectives.
For example common basic indicators suggested for use in Saharan and Sahelian Africa36
relate to the twin objectives of elimination of poverty and natural resources
management. A working set of candidate (likely or possible) indicators for
Mediterranean Europe was compiled for all of the issues described above.
What's a
candidate
indicator?
Candidate indicators are those that are suggested from different sources as being
potentially useful. They will remain as candidate indicators until they have been fully
tested and adopted for the final version of the Indicator system
Sources of
indicators
The initial list of candidate indicators came from the following sources.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Indicators already used to map desertification at a national scale by the Annex IV Focal
Points, as described in their reports to the Second MEDRAP Workshop, 6 to 8 June 200237
All indicators described by Enne and Zucca. 200038. in Desertification indicators for the
Europe Mediterranean region: state of the art and possible methodological approaches
All indicators described in Kosmas et al. 199939 Manual on key indicators of desertification
and mapping environmentally sensitive areas to desertification
All indicators listed in Greeuw et al. 2001. Factors, actors, sectors and indicators: the
concepts and application in MedAction. Report #1 from the MedAction Project40.
Other indicators suggested by the expert knowledge of members of the DESERTLINKS
project and by local stakeholders.
Local stakeholders in target areas within Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece are being invited
to workshops and consulted about the identification and testing of indicators. Standard
tested methods for conducting workshops, based on EASW41 (the European Awareness
Scenario Workshop initiative) have been adapted for use in the DESERTLINKS project, to
ensure that the workshops are carried out in a standardised way.
Reforestation in the Alentejo, Portugal, Photo by Maria Roxo
Observatoire du Sahara et du Sahel 2002 "NAP monitoring and evaluation systems". Report to the 4th
Conference of the Parties to the CCD
37 MEDRAP : Concerted Action to support the northern mediterranean regional action programme to
combat desertification. http://www.uniss.it/nrd/medrap
38 Enne, G. and Zucca, C. 2000. Desertification indicators for the European Mediterranean region: state of
the art and possible methodological approaches. ANPA, Roma and NRD, Sassari, 261 p
39 C. Kosmas, M. Kirkby and N. Geeson, 1999. The MEDALUS Project: Mediterranean desertificiation and
land use. Manual on key indicators of desertification and mapping environmentally sensitive areas to
desertification. European Commission Project Report, EUR 18882
40 http://www.icis.unimaas.nl/medaction
41 EASW http://www.cordis.lu/easw/src/intro.htm
35
36
23
Candidate
desertification
indicator list for
Mediterranean
Europe
ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS
Rainfall
Rainfall seasonality
Rainfall erosivity
Rainfall spatial distribution
Potential Evapotranspiration
Aridity index
Flooding frequency
Dam sedimentation
Slope Aspect
Slope Gradient
Soil Depth
Soil Texture
Aridity
Soil structure
Aridity/ drought index
Frost Change frequency
Bio-climatic index
Parent material
Flood-plain and channel
morphology
Stability of surface horizon
Infiltration capacity
Drainage
Increase in soil OM content
Soil Organic Matter mixing
with depth
Soil Organic Matter in surface Erosion protection
soil
Rock Fragments
Groundwater depth
Forest fragmentation
Rainfall-runoff relationship
Erosion Risk
Soil erosion
Salinized area
Purchasing power parity
Global economic growth
Land Abandoned from
Agriculture
Area of marginal soil used
Diversification of land use
Soil water conservation
measures
Sustainable forest management
Organic farming
Inflation
Urban sprawl
Prices of agricultural products
Employment index
Unemployment rate
Demand for agricultural jobs
Length of road network
Status of road network
Land use index
Tourism change
Number of tourists
Tourist destination
Type of tourist
Water use by tourists
Farm ownership
Family size
Land use type
Land use intensity
Farm size
Number and size of land
parcels per farm
Parallel employment
Mechanisation index
Fertilizer application
Sustainable farming
Storage of Runoff
Reclamation of affected soils
Grazing control
Fire Protection
Reclamation of mining areas
Tradition of collecting an
exploiting water and flood
prevention
Export volumes
Import volumes
Aquifer exploitation
Expenditure on energy
Farmer's age
Subsidies
Irrigated area
Irrigation uptake
Expenditure on water
Expenditure on fertiliser
Net farm income
Expenditure on plastics
ECONOMIC INDICATORS
GDP/GNP per capita
Period of existing land use
type
Land Use History
Area of cultivated & seminatural vegetation
Area of impervious surface
Soil mapping units
Soil characteristics index
Vegetation composition
Vegetation cover
Quantity and density of
species in area
Relationship between wellpreserved and degraded
area
Ecosystem resilience
Area of matorral
Deforested Area
Drought Resistance
Drought adaptation
Crop Productivity
Forest Productivity
Demand for agricultural
products
Demand for nonagricultural products
Grazing impact
Grazing intensity
Grazing
Tillage depth
Tillage direction
Tillage operations
Area of hillslope cultivated
Cost of not doing anything
Irrigation intensity and
seawater intrusion
Runoff water storage
SOCIAL INDICATORS
Population
Population density
Old Age index
Age structure
Gini index
Human Poverty index
Population growth rate
Transient Population
Number of rich people
Demographic variation index Mortality rate
INSTITUTIONAL INDICATORS
Water use policy/law
EU subsidy structure
Protection by national parks
National funding
Land Use Policy
Policy enforcement
Regional/local funding
Agri-environmental
management
Adult education level
Money spent on scientific
research
Cultivated area under
subsidy
Farmer cooperatives
Protected areas
24
Ground water recharge
Water Quality and salinity
Disappearance of water springs
Wild fire incidence
Burned Area
Fire Frequency
Fire Risk
Acidified area
Salinization Potential
Land Terraces
Soil erosion control measures
Literacy rate
Public perception of
desertification
Number of technicians with a
knowledge of desertification
Following the example of the CSD, and in order to ensure that the different dimensions
of desertification are adequately represented, the indicators were categorized according
to whether they are principally ecological, economic, social or institutional in relevance.
Criteria for
evaluating
indicators
The process of evaluating the candidate indicators is ongoing. The candidate indicator
list above contains a list of generic indicator names some of which may be very similar,
irrelevant or unusable. It will also certainly need to be extended as the needs of local
and national stakeholders are clarified.
There are many lists of criteria by which candidate indicator names should be judged
before they are turned into operational indicators, including those written by the
European Topic Centre on Terrestrial Environment42 and the OECD 43. Most of these
criteria are intuitive and include things like:
•
specificity
•
data quality and availability
•
ease of measurability
•
analytical soundness
•
ease of interpretation and comprehensibility.
•
clear time boundaries
However the final list also needs to contain a sufficient range of types of indicators in
order to:
•
enable an integrated assessment of desertification, not only within the
ecological, economic, social and institutional framework, but also within a
driving force, pressure, state, impact and response framework (DPSIR);
•
reflect change in land function;
•
reflect change over time;
•
provide information according to changing spatial scale;
•
provide a variety of indices from aggregated indicators.
European Topic Centre on Terrestrial Environment http://terrestrial.eionet.eu.int/Indicators
Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, Volume 3: Methods and Results, OECD, Paris March 2001.
www.oecd.org/agr/env/indicators.htm
42
43
25
26
BUILDING A
DESERTIFICATION
INDICATOR SYSTEM FOR
MEDITERRANEAN EUROPE
44
The framework
A choice of
ways to use
the system
The main components of the Indicator System are: an
indicator Data Base and a choice of methods for accessing
those indicators.
The obvious choice is for the reader to be able to consult a list of desertification
indicators, each fully described, including data requirements, alternatively the reader
may have a desertification problem or issue for which they would like to find a list of
relevant indicators. Issues have been classified under ten themes, e.g. land abandonment,
using expert scientific knowledge. For all the themes and sub-themes relevant indicators
are suggested and described, and relationships are discussed. Desertification risk under
different land uses, such as cultivation of olives or cereals, are also linked to the most
relevant indicators. Statistical techniques have been used to explore methods of
determining whether indicators are statistically significant, along with an expert system
for evaluating the Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) for a local area. Finally provision
is made to offer indicators at a range of spatial scales, from a single field to the scale of
the whole of southern Europe. The uses of statistical modelling and remote sensing in
this context are explained.
Indicator Data Base45
The Indicator Data Base is structured so that it may be
used by a wide range of users and be clearly and
unequivocally interpreted.
It is intended to be an interactive web tool to store, retrieve, and discuss indicators. We
are ensuring that the Data Base attached to the Desertification Indicator System is fully
comprehensive and flexible in its approach.
Description
of indicators
Interactive
Data Base
All the indicators in the Data Base are described according to a common format which
acts as a guide and to encourage clear thinking about the subsequent use of indicators.
The format describes all the information necessary for qualifying an indicator. It may not
be possible to fill in all the boxes for all indicators. A parameter can only be considered
to be an indicator, ready for use as an operational tool, when fully described and linked
to clear objectives and specific contexts. For further details of the classification
framework, please see Appendix 6.
The interactive database will be a web based operational tool. It constitutes a working
environment for project partners and for associated experts, who will be allowed to
access and upload their own candidate indicators (by filling in forms similar to the one
shown below).
44
45
Sheep grazing in the Guadalentín, Spain, photo by Jorge Garcia Gomez
Contributed by C. Zucca and G. Enne, NRD, University of Sassari, [email protected]
27
Standard
format for
indicator
descriptions
1. Definition
Name
Name (or acronym) of indicator
Brief definition
Brief definition of the indicator in relation to its purpose in the particular context
for which it will be used.
Unit of measurement
Unit of measurement appropriate for quantifying the value and variations of the
proposed indicator.
2. Position within the logical framework DPSIR
Type of indicator
Indicate to which category the indicator belongs within the DPSIR framework
(Driving forces, Pressures, State, Impacts, Responses).
Give the reasons for placing the indicator in one of the categories of the logical
framework and indicate what other indicators should be placed in this category or
in others, to complete the description of the system.
For example, if an indicator of state is proposed for a process of soil salinisation,
indicate, if possible, any other likely indicators of state applicable to this particular
problem, and related pressure, response, etc. indicators, also providing information
on the persons / organizations best able to define them thoroughly.
3. Target and political pertinence
Objective / target of the indicator
Summary description of the main objective to be achieved by using the indicator.
Importance with respect to
desertification
Indicate if, how and at what scale the indicator could contribute to the elaboration
of desertification strategies, to understanding and monitoring trends and the
efficiency of sustainable development policies.
International Conventions and
agreements
Indicate other international agreements and conventions for which the use and
design of the particular indicator can provide a significant contribution.
Secondary objectives of the indicator
Describe possible objectives other than the main ones mentioned above, to which
the indicator could contribute.
4. Methodological description and basic definitions
Definitions and basic concepts
Broad definition with reference to the nature of the indicator and its importance
and effectiveness in relation to the objectives and to the state of the art of
knowledge in the specific context (why this indicator and not another to reach the
same assigned target).
Benchmarks
Indication of the values/ranges of the
value
Benchmarks as “reference site”, “baseline data” “reference threshold value”.
Indication of the values/ranges of values; their meaning in relation to the purpose
and to the specific context of application; how they have been defined
Methods of measurement
Description of the methodology to be followed to measure, calculate and exploit
the indicator.
Limits of the indicator
Describe the possible reasons for and conditions under which the indicator could
not fulfil its purpose (for example, indicate at what spatial scale the indicator
provides adequate information and explain why it cannot apply to a different
scale).
Clearly define the context and conditions of applicability and the constraints to be
considered in relation to the exportability.
Linkages with other indicators
Indicate, if relevant, the relationship between the indicator in question and other
indicators (for example, within a same methodology, model or forecasting system)
so as to better clarify both the context in which the indicator proves the most
useful, and the ultimate target of the indicator itself
5. Evaluation of data needs and availability
Data required to calculate the
indicator
Give a detailed indication of the characteristics of data required to measure,
calculate and elaborate the indicator.
Data sources
Indicate the sources from which data can be gathered.
Availability of data from national
Indicate whether the required data is easily available or not and specify if obtaining
and international sources
it is reasonably cost effective.
6. Institutions that have participated in developing the indicator
Main institutions responsible
Other contributing organizations
7. Additional information
Bibliography
Other references
Contacts
Internet addresses and other useful references
Name and address of the organization that elaborated the indicator: person to
contact.
28
Users will also be able to evaluate, comment and accept candidate indicators proposed
by other experts, to edit their own records, to browse and search the database and, of
course, to share their contribution with the wider web community. This way, the
database is expected to become a “living system”, growing through the contribution of
all partners. The browsing/search system integrates the classification criteria presented
above as well as other grouping criteria based on the “issue/problem concerned”
approach (soil erosion, land abandonment, fire risk, etc.). The web interface allows
access to data from web pages, thus making use of hyperlinks for data navigation.
Storing information in a database instead of in static web pages, makes it easy to
maintain, search for and refer to data.
Indicators of relevance
to particular issues
One of the most important features of the Desertification
Indicator System for Mediterranean Europe is the way in
which groups of indicators have been identified to be of
importance to specific desertification issues.
In the first instance this has been achieved by matching indicators to issues using expert
knowledge. In the future this process will be refined using various multivariate analyses.
Example of a
page in the
indicator
system ready
to be
developed to
give
information
on a
particular
issue
Issue 1: Land abandonment
1. Description of reasons leading to land abandonment and why it is an issue in the context of
desertification
Reasons: climatic conditions; soil conditions; water availability; employment opportunities in agriculture
and elsewhere; income from land; changing rural population; availability of alternative choices; things
going on in the wider world.
Why it is an issue: land abandonment leads to a change in land management; change in vegetation cover
2. Examples of reasons for land abandonment in each of the target areas.
e.g. Spain. Shift from dry farming on hillslopes to intensive irrigated farming on coastal lowlands, attraction
of employment in coastal zone
3. Overview of how the indicators inter-relate
This should include:
• diagramatic representation of inter-relationships between indicators
• evaluation of which indicators explain most of the variability in land abandonment .
4. Link to simple or more complex models which demonstrate this inter-relation (optional, depending on
the issue in question).
Links to be added as appropriate
5. Link to table of related indicators
Link to indicators specifically relating to this issue
Expert
knowledge
Desertification experts at a workshop were asked to use their expert knowledge to relate
indicators on the candidate list to the issues identified by the national and local
stakeholders. Their expertise includes: GIS, remote sensing, desertification indicators, soil
erosion, hydrological modelling, mapping soil erosion risk at European scales, forestry,
agricultural ecosystems, processes on abandoned land, policy analysis, rural
development, desertification control planning, vegetation degradation. The candidate
indicators were evaluated as to whether they are not related, related or strongly related
29
to themes and sub-themes of the issues of Mediterranean desertification and the scale
(local or national) at which they are relevant. Those 10 to 20 indicators on which there
was most consensus of their relevance to each theme were thus identified.
The figures below demonstrate how expert knowledge was further used to develop
those pages of the indicator system giving background information on each main issue
and explaining how the indicators interrelate. Headline indicators for routine
monitoring are being identified. Many of these are essential to understanding
desertification and are already in widespread use by National Action Programmes or
within other indicator systems, e.g. water availability per capita, vegetation cover.
Example of a
page from
the indicator
system
showing
which
indicators are
related to the
sub-themes of
land
abandonment
Indicators related to LAND ABANDONMENT
Indicator
Main theme:
land abandonment
Sub-themes
climatic conditions
soil conditions
Water availability
employment
opportunities in
agriculture and
elsewhere
income from land
changing rural
population
availability of alternative
choices
Things going on in the
wider world
change in land
management
change in vegetation
cover
Land abandoned from agriculture
Area of cultivated & semi-natural
vegetation
Rainfall
Climate quality index
Soil quality index
Soil mapping unit
Erosion risk
Salinized area
Ground water depth
Water quality
Disappearance of springs
Irrigated area
Employment index
Demand for agricultural jobs
Parallel employment
Farm ownership
Farmer's age
Subsidies
Net farm income
Population density
Demographic variation index
Age structure
Farmer cooperatives
Public perception of desertification
Number of technicians with a knowledge
of desertification
Water use policy/law
Land Use Policy
Policy enforcement
EU subsidy structure
National funding
Regional/local funding
Cultivated area under subsidy
Soil erosion control measures
Soil water conservation measures
Erosion Risk
Vegetation cover
Quantity and density of species in area
30
Headline
Headline
Inclusion of indicators
at coarser spatial scales
Clearly different approaches are required for identifying
useful indicators of desertification according to the spatial
scale.
Data requirements are very different for mapping at a national or Mediterranean scale
compared to the local scale. In the same way monitoring techniques are also different.
Remote
sensing
A broad range of potential remote sensing based desertification indicators has been
discussed and reviewed in related publications46. In the context of this indicator system,
however, concentration is on those which refer to the issues and themes, identified as
most relevant in the Mediterranean context by the consulted stakeholders and experts.
Indeed most of them relate to vegetation cover and its changes, but also to issues such as
urban sprawl and top soil organic matter content. Preference has been given to those
indicators which can be obtained already quasi-operationally by remote sensing alone,
where the remote sensing component is central in indicator modelling or where we
expect an increasing importance of remote sensing in the near future. A further criterion
was knowledge of existing major European initiatives addressing an issue, such as in the
case of urban sprawl or forest fire.
The table below lists indicators which have the strongest potential to be derived with
major contributions from remote sensing. Although only 9 (7 ecological and 2 economic
indicators) are selected, it should be noted that there are a number of other issues and
indicators where remote sensing information may play a role (e.g. grazing, land
abandonment etc) in particular applied in combination with geomatics, ecological and
socio-economic modelling (GeoRange, LADAMER).
Desertification
indicators with
the strongest
potential for
remote sensing
applications
Indicator
Vegetation cover
Ecosystem resilience (Rain use
efficiency)
Burned area
Fire frequency
Forest fragmentation
Soil organic matter in surface
soil
Urban sprawl
Area of cultivated and seminatural vegetation
Measurement/Unit
Mediterranean
wide
% green vegetation X
Trends of change of X
rain use efficiency
Ha/spatial unit
X
No of fires/spatial
X
unit
Fragmentation
X
index
% SOC,
experimental
Ha/year
e.g. coastal
zones
Ratio/raster cell
X (experimental)
Ratio/spatial unit
Target area
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
For further information about the role of remote sensing in obtaining desertification
indicators please see Appendix 8.
Hill J. and Peter D.(Eds.), 1996: The use of remote sensing for land degradation and desertification
monitoring in the Mediterranean basin. EUR 16732 EN. Luxembourg. Office for Official Publications of the
European Communities. ISBN 92-827-7784-7. 235 p.
Menenti M, S. Azzali and M. Boss, 1999: EARLY WARNING ON DESERTIFICATION AND LAND
DEGRADATION,;Prepared on behalf of the European Commission for the Third Meeting of the EC/MS
Expert Group on Desertification, Brussels, Centre Borschette, 7 April 1999, 93 p.
46
31
Regional
scale
modelling
Another important advance in regional scale indicators, has been in the Regional
Degradation Index model, being used for mapping soil erosion across the northern
Mediterranean (in conjunction with the PESERA47 project). The objectives of this work
have been to provide an indicator of soil erosion risk at the regional scale, suitable for
planning and policy for national and continental areas. The indictor is expressed on a
qualitative scale. The output is a weighted average based on the expected long-term
frequency of storms of all magnitudes, but values cannot be regarded as forecasts due to
uncertainty in storm magnitude.
The model (Kirkby et al, 48). is based on a simple and conservative erosion model,
which is disaggregated into components, which depend on climate, vegetation,
topography and soil factors. The rate of sediment transport is estimated as a mean soil
loss (Tonnes/Ha), obtained as a product of the model components. As the components
are explicit, the impact of changes in land use or climate can also be clearly identified, so
that sensitivity to changed conditions can be explored. The model is currently being
applied at a 1 km resolution for the whole of Europe except for some areas where some
data is missing. With data at finer resolution, the model may be applied at 250m or
better resolution to areas of particular concern. There is also scope, using globally
available data sources, to apply the model world-wide at a resolution of 10km, although
with some inevitable degradation of quality. The emphasis of the PESERA-RDI model is
the prediction of hillslope erosion, and the delivery of erosion products to the base of
each hillslope. Channel delivery processes and channel routing are explicitly not
considered.
Erosion predictions are reliant on estimating a stabilised vegetation cover and identifying
the generation of overland runoff on a cell by cell basis. The PESERA-RDI_GRID coarse
scale code distributes the point based model across the European grid generating a series
of physically based estimates of potential monthly erosion at a 1km x 1km grid
resolution for Europe. For further details of the Regional Degradation Index model see
Appendix 7
Using the indicator
system for online
calculation of
desertification risk
Expert system for
evaluating the
Environmental
Sensitivity Index
(ESI) for a local
area
A major use of the indicator system is to provide some
estimate of desertification risk for an area or a single field.
That is one thing that most end-users will be looking for. In
the Indicator System it will be possible for the user to
calculate "Desertification risk"49 and an aggregated index
combining 6 or 7 of the most relevant indicators for a
number of specific situations.
An interactive tool will be available to evaluate the Environmental Sensitivity Index
(ESI)50 for a local area. Description and calculation of the ESI is described in Appendix 9.
Through specific links on the website it will be possible for the user to assess the
‘desertification risk’ for a local area; to learn how to obtain desertification risk maps
from local to basin-wide and regional scales; and to see examples of desertification risk
maps. The interface consists of a set of pull down menus from which the classes of a
Pan European Soil Erosion Assessment. http://www.pesera.jrc.it
Kirkby, M.J., Le Bissonais, Y., Coulthard, T.J., Daroussin, J. and McMahon, M.D., 2000. The
development of Land Quality Indicators for Soil Degradation by Water Erosion. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment.
49 Contribution from C, Kosmas, Agricultural University of Athens, [email protected]
50 Contribution from A. Ferrara, University of Basilicata, [email protected]
47
48
32
series of physical, environmental and socio-economical indicators (e.g. type of
vegetation, annual rainfall, soil depth, land use intensity, etc.) can be selected.
Environmental
sensitivity is a
composite
indicator that can
be used to gain an
understanding of
factors causing
desertification risk
at a point. The
diagram shows
which indicators
can be used to
calculate it.
A screen view
of the tool to
analyse
Environmental
Sensitivity for a
local area
Following selection of the expert system, the user can obtain:
•
an evaluation of the quality of the environment being examined for the four
main components of vegetation, climate, soil and management;
•
the estimate of the desertification risk of the area;
•
an evaluation of the most critical factors that are present in the area;
•
an evaluation of the critical interactions among factors that are present in the
area.
33
On the basis of their use the indicators present in the system fall into three main
categories:
•
Required (a class must be selected), to perform an accurate estimate of the ESI
using a minimal set of information;
(Vegetation type, Vegetation cover, Rainfall, Slope aspect, Soil depth, Slope
•
•
gradient, Parent material, Rock fragments, Policy enforcement, Land use
intensity)
Optional (a class may be selected), to produce an optimised estimate of the ESI;
(Aridity index, Drainage, Texture)
Additional (a class may be selected), to analyse particular aspects of the area and
test new indicators.
What the
expert system
does
This tool can also be used to predict what will happen if one or more parameters are
changed. A user may wish to evaluate the consequences in terms of desertification risk of
e.g. change in the type of vegetation if farming decisions have to be made, or change in
annual rainfall if a trend of climatic change is explored. Further details of the ESI tool
can be viewed within the Indicator System on the accompanying CD-ROM.
Desertification
risk for
particular land
uses
Another use of indicators demonstrated in the system is a methodology for calculating
desertification risk under specific land uses. The landscape of Mediterranean Europe is
certainly very varied, from the open, rolling montado of southern Portugal, to steeply
sloping terraced olive groves of Greece. However, olives and other land uses such as
pasture, cereals and pine forest are common to many areas. Different land uses place
different demands on the natural resources and have different management regimes.
Consequently they also have different desertification risks.
Data and
analysis
A series of candidate indicators related to desertification has been identified in
collaboration with local stakeholders on the Greek island of Lesvos. Emphasis has been
given to indicators affecting management quality, such as cultivation of the land
(implements used, ploughing depth, direction of cultivation, etc.), overuse of shallow
soils, grazing density, terracing of land and maintenance of terraces, irrigation, (water
quality and soil water availability), etc. Classes have been defined for each indicator and
numbers have been assigned for each class according to the importance to
desertification. Data were collected from a large number of field sites corresponding to
various types of land use such as pastures, pine forests, deciduous forests, cereals, olive
groves, vineyards, etc. A variety of environmentally sensitive areas have been selected,
covering typical geological, topographical and climatic conditions and typical types of
land use for Mediterranean Europe. All the data have been geo-referenced to existing
databases for Europe. Statistical analysis was conducted for each of the parameters in
order to define: (a) the correlation of the parameter to the stage of land degradation
(correlation coefficient), (b) the interrelationships between various parameters (analysis
of covariance), (c) the effect of each parameter on the sensitivity to desertification
(analysis of variance). Algorithms were defined for each type of land use using that can
be easily used for identified desertification risk at a farm level.
34
An example
of the
indicators
shown to
relate to
desertification
risk for olive
groves
OLIVES
Sustainable farming
Freq. of flooding
No of parcels
Previous land use
Tillage operation
Management
Topography
DESERTIFICATION RISK
Slope exposure
Parent material
Climate
Rainfall
Soil
Depth
Making the indicator
system relevant to
both desertification
and end-users
policy enforcement
Texture
It is important that the indicators chosen for the
DESERTLINKS Desertification Indicator System are relevant
to the aims and objectives of the National Action
Programmes. Dialogue through members of DESERTLINKS,
who are also part of their National Committees will ensure
that these needs are met.
Headline
indicators
Some of these indicators are Headline indicators and can be proposed for common use
in monitoring desertification in all Annex IV countries. Indicators are also included that
are specifically relevant to local stakeholders. Their needs are being evaluated through a
series of stakeholder workshops.
Changes in
desertification
processes
over time
Desertification processes are dynamic. This means that changes over time and space need
special consideration, and indicators must address this problem. Different landscapes can
be at different stages of desertification, with their function changing over time. It may
therefore be difficult to suggest general benchmarks and critical values for indicators, but
it is possible where the critical values are linked to specific issues or contexts.
Easier access
for users
DESERTLINKS is considering the perspective of the potential user at all stages in the
development of the Indicator System. All methods and guidelines must be presented in
simple language, but with the opportunity to explore the subject in more scientific detail
as required. It must be easy to find basic information that is well linked on the web
pages. It is hope that the interest of readers will be stimulated, so that they broaden
their understanding in an enjoyable way.
35
36
CONCLUSIONS AND
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
51
General
movement to
identify and
use
desertification
indicators
Exploitation
and
application of
earlier
research
DESERTLINKS is developing a Desertification Indicator System at a time when political
and scientific initiatives on European desertification are moving in a parallel direction.
The UNCCD have developed a strategy for combating desertification that requires
affected countries to develop monitoring techniques and national and regional action
programmes involving stakeholders. Desertification indicators have been identified as a
potentially useful tool for both management and monitoring, and the Northern
Mediterranean countries are searching for a common methodology for identifying and
using such indicators.
Valuable and useful results, knowledge and expertise, including proto-type indicator
systems at different scales, have been obtained from previous research into land
degradation and desertification in Mediterranean Europe. These are being combined
with new kinds of indicators, identified by scientific experts, the Focal Points of the
Annex IV countries, and local stakeholders in a number of desertification-affected areas.
The resulting Desertification Indicator System will be a significant contribution to the
work of the UNCCD, and will have wider applications beyond Annex IV to other
regions of the world affected by desertification. Desertification is treated as a societydriven problem that can be effectively managed by applying existing knowledge
through a thorough comprehension of the principal processes consequent on land use
and environmental change.
Who are the
intended
users of the
system?
The DESERTLINKS Desertification System currently gives access to some 170 indicators of
relevance to desertification. It is intended that the indicator system be used by:
• National Committees for national and regional management and monitoring of
desertification;
• Local stakeholders seeking to understand desertification processes and to explore
local alternative land uses.
What are the
system's
current
capacities?
The system can be used in a variety of different ways, to:
• View the complete list of indicators (grouped according to their relevance to
ecophysical, economic, ecological and institutional aspects of desertification)
• View indicators relating to specific desertification issues (such as changing land
use or institutional organisation)
• View indicators relating to specific land uses (such as pine forest, cereals)
• Assess the desertification risk and Environmental Sensitivity Index of your local
area.
Future
developments
There are a large number of lists of indicators relevant to desertification available, but
few examples of Systems where the indicators can be put to practical use. Practicality
51
Agri basin, Italy, photo by Agostino Ferrara
37
requires a logical and disciplined organisation of information to serve the needs of
endusers from a wide range of backgrounds. DESERTLINKS is seeking to achieve this and
the prototype Desertification Indicator System that can be explored on the
accompanying CD-ROM demonstrates the progress so far. It will be important to test
the System in new desertified areas of Mediterranean Europe in collaboration with the
Annex IV Focal Points and local stakeholders. In this way the list of candidate indicators
can be refined; and fully tested, fully described indicators will be adopted for general
use. The inter-relationships between indicators and associated desertification issues and
problems will be further explored and described, as will the combination of indicators as
indexes. The final major products of DESERTLINKS will be a fully operational web-based
interactive Desertification Indicator System, accompanied by a detailed and
comprehensive Manual of Desertification Indicators based on the framework of this
booklet.
38
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CAP
DIS/MED
EEA
EC
ESA
ESI
EU
EUROSTAT
JRC
MEDALUS III
NAP
RAP
UNCCD
Drought
Common Agricultural Policy
Desertification Information System to Support National
Action Programmes in the Mediterranean (DIS/MED)
European Environment Agency
European Commission
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Environmental Sensitivity Index
European Union
Statistical Service of the European Union
Joint Research Centre (of the European Union)
Mediterranean Desertification and Land Use (EU-funded
research project, 1996 -1999)
National Action Programme
Regional Action Programme
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and
39
40
AnnexSour
IV ce
documents
Italy
Appendix 1: The problems, issues and solutions associated with Mediterranean
desertification as identified in the National Action Plans; First and
Second National Reports on the Implementation of the UNCCD,
April 2000; Reports of the National Committees to Combat
Desertification to the Second MEDRAP workshop "Identification of
Sensitive Areas", Tróia, Portugal, 6 to 8 June 2002
•
•
•
Greece
•
•
•
Portugal
•
•
•
•
Spain
•
•
•
•
National Action Programme to combat drought and desertification, Rome,
December 1999. http:/unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/national/2000/italyeng.pdf
National Report of Italy on the Implementation of the UNCCD, 2000
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2000/italy-eng.pdf
http://www.desertification.it/doc/nationalreport.htm
Committee for the review of the implementation of the convention. Second
reporting process on UNCCD implementation. Italy National Report, April 30
2002. http://unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2002/italy-eng.pdf
Greek National Committee for combating desertification: First national report on
the implementation of the United Nations Convention to combat desertification.
Athens March 2000. .
http://unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2000/greece-eng.pdf
Greek National Action Plan for combating desertification. (Extended Summary),
Athens - January 2001.
http://www.unccd.int/actionprogrammes/northmed/national/2001/greece-eng.pdf
Greek National Committee for combating desertification: Second national report
on the implementation of the United Nations Convention to combat
desertification. Athens April 2002.
http://unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2002/greece-eng.pdf
National Action Plan to Combat Desertification – 17 June 1999.
Portugal – Summary of National Report
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2000/portugal-summaryeng.pdf
National Report on the implementation of the convention to combat
desertification in Portugal. April 2002.
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2002/portugal-eng.pdf
DISMED Technical workshop on thematic and sensitivity mapping on desertification
and drought – Portuguese report, March 2002. http://p-case.iata.fi.cnr.it/dismed/Djerba-presentations.htm
SPAIN SURMODES website: http://www.eeza.csic.es/Spain SURMODES
DISMED Technical Workshop on NAP information needs. Spanish NCB report, July
2001. http://p-case.iata.fi.cnr.it/dis-med/ . DISMED_Florence_spain_NCB.rtf
National Report on the implementation of the convention to combat
desertification in Spain. April 2002. Il informe sobre el programa de accion nacional
contra la desertification.
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/national/2002/spain-spa.pdf
Second Annex IV sub-regional report for the implementation of the UNCCD.
Athens, Greece, April 2002.
41
•
Analysis of
sources for
descriptions
of specific
desertification
-related issues
http://www.unccd.int/cop/reports/northmed/regional/2002/group_of_annex_iv_co
untries-eng.pdf
MEDRAP : Concerted Action to support the northern Mediterranean regional
action programme to combat desertification http://www.uniss.it/nrd/medrap
PROBLEM
Abandonment of marginal lands and historical
settlements, depopulation
Depopulation, migration
COUNTRY
I, P
P, S
Information collection, analysis and dissemination
needs organisation
Lack of desertification indicators of a socio-economic
nature
Lack of information on the evolution of desertification
Initial enthusiasm reduced by inactivity
Lack of specific funding for the implementation of the
Convention
S
Over-exploitation of soil and water resources linked to
financial investment
S, I,P
Damage to forests by drought
Deforestation, causing soil erosion
Damage to land surface by fire (frequency and extent)
S
G
S, I, G
Discrimination between current and relict
desertification (S) or reversible and non-reversible
desertification (G)
Forecasting desertification under chosen climatic and
socio-economic scenarios
Climatic stress: drought, dryness, decline in water
reserves, variability of rainfall
S, G
Monitoring land degradation status over large areas
using objective and low cost methods
S, G
Groundwater aquifers may be subject to seawater
intrusion due to over-pumping for irrigation, or
geology
G,I
Lack of public awareness of the problem of
desertification
G ,P
Soil loss, compaction or reduction of soil organic
matter
Soil erosion accelerated by frequent forest fires,
extreme precipitation on steep slopes and overgrazing
Severe erosion on steep south and southeast exposed
slopes
Steep slopes increase the threat of soil erosion
especially in conjunction with extreme rainfall and
unsuitable agricultural techniques
Increased surface runoff due to reduction of soil water
retention
Soil erosion by water and wind limits the rootable
depth of soil
Existing soil and water conservation structures are not
being maintained
Management of water resources is lacking
Management of aquifer resources and sea water
intrusion is lacking
Tendency towards reduction of annual rainfall
I
S
S
P
G, P
Ref
p6 National Report of Italy 2000
p14 NAP Portugal report 1999
p11 NAP Portugal report 1999
SPAIN SURMODES website, 2002
p7 DISMED-Florence-Spain 2001, SPAIN
SURMODES website, 2002
p7 DISMED-Florence-Spain, 2001
p7 DISMED-Florence-Spain, 2001
p4 National Report, Portugal, 2002
p8 Second National Report of Greece,
2002
p6 National Report, Portugal, 2002
p2 DISMED-Florence-Spain, 2001
SPAIN SURMODES website, 2002
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p17 NAP Portugal report 1999
p2 DISMED-Florence-Spain, 2001
p15 First National Report Greece 2000
p2 DISMED-Florence-Spain, 2001
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p16 Greek National Action Plan 2001
SPAIN SURMODES website, 2002
p11 Greek National Action Plan 2001
S
SPAIN SURMODES website, 2002
I,G,P
p11 National Report, Portugal, 2002
p16 Second National Report of Greece,
2002
Italy National Report, 2002
SPAIN SURMODES website, 2002
p1 DISMED-Florence-Spain, 2001
p28 Second National Report of Greece,
2002
p6 Second National Report of Greece,
2002
p6 National Report of Italy 2000
I, G
G
p21 Second National Report of Greece,
2002
p17 NAP Portugal report 1999
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p6 National Report of Italy 2000
p6 National Report of Italy 2000
p16 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p4 Greek National Action Plan
G, I
p15 First National Report Greece 2000
National Report of Italy 2000
P
p1 Portugal NAP 1999
G
p6 Greek National Action Plan
G
p15 First National Report Greece 2000
G, I, S
S, G
p9 Second National Report Greece 2002
p18 Second National Report Greece
G
p7 Greek National Action Plan
42
Salinisation
G, I
Chemical pollution
G, I
Acidification
Reduction or degradation of plant cover e.g. clearing
of forest for agricultural expansion
Urban development
Loss of economic productivity of traditional agriculture
Lack of new policies to counterbalance effects of
market globalisation
Lack of policies to combat adverse agricultural market
effects
Lack of compatible standards and systems between
countries
Low cost monitoring methods required
Desertification forecasting methods required
Effective water erosion control
Control of surface crusting
Control of soil salinisation
Control of nitrate pollution of groundwater
Soil water conservation and increasing freshwater
supply
Ensuring a response to natural and man-made water
shortage
Short-term perspectives and use of technology do not
support sustainability
Accelerated soil erosion, due to wildfires and
agricultural and forestry practices that result in removal
of vegetation cover
Inter-basin water transfers established in the National
Hydrological Plan may foster direction of population
and investment to littoral and irrigated areas where
consumption of resources may be unsustainable and
contribute to abandonment of inland cropping areas
Land suitable for restoration is often not in public
hands and co-operation with private landowners may
be lacking
Threat and consequences of drought
Scarcity of freshwater supplies
Progressive decline in economic activities
Inadequate development of new economic activities
Progressive specialisation in agriculture
Abandonment of hilly areas
Low levels of competition between extremely
specialised companies
Lack of marketing support structures
Low quality water resources
G
I, G
SOLUTION
COUNTRY
Ref
G, I
p7 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p3, p11 Greek National Action Plan, 2001
p21 Italy National Report 2002
p3 Greek National Action Plan, 2001
p8, p16 Italy National Report, 2002
p10 National Report Spain 2002
Portugal Summary Report 2000
p7 NAP report 1999
p15 National Report Spain 2002
p24 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p17 NAP Portugal report 1999
p15 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p54 National Report Spain 2002
p7, p8 Italy National Report, 2002
Collaboration with international partners
I
I
I
p7 Greek National Action Plan
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p7 Greek National Action Plan
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p7 Greek National Action Plan
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p16 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p6 National Report of Italy 2000
p6 National Report of Italy 2000
I
p8 Italy National Report 2002
I
p17 Italy National Report 2002
S, G
S, G, I
Annex IV
Annex IV
Annex IV
Annex IV
Annex IV
Spain SURMODES website 2002
Spain SURMODES website 2002
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p6 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
S
S
MEDRAP Report June 2002
S
MEDRAP Report June 2002
G
G
I
I
I
I
I
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
I
I
MEDRAP Report June 2002
Formulation of national strategies and priorities
G, I, S, P
Research programmes on a national scale
S, G, P
Ensuring necessary funding for the application of
measures
Transfer of jurisdiction and responsibility over
environmental policies from national to regional or
local scales
Promotion of public awareness
G, S
I
G, S, P
43
p25 First National Report Greece
p3, p9 Greek National Action Plan, 2001
Specialist courses at universities and research centres
Copies of the NAP have been sent to all universities to
increase awareness of the problem
Application of the NAP to pilot areas
G
G
EASW workshops have been held in pilot areas to
increase awareness and enthusiasm
Preparation of Codes of Good Agricultural Practice
with subsidies for those who conform
Protection of steep slopes from soil erosion, e.g. as
subsidised set-aside land
P
Control of land clearance and deforestation that leave
areas prone to erosion
Recovery and reconstruction of terraces on sloping
land to reduce soil erosion, enhance water storage,
promote traditional farming and reduce depopulation
Reduction of soil water loss by using best practice
cultivation measures, such as mulching, minimum tillage
Small stones and gravel on the soil surface should not
be removed as they reduce evaporation losses
Clarification of forest-land ownership to aid
preservation of natural vegetation and reduce fire risk
G
Reforestation of burned forest, and improved forest
management to reduce fire risk
G,I,P
Sustainable management and expansion of forest areas
I
Establishment of national and regional plans/policies
for sustainable development
Creation of a National Coordinating Body to
implement and evaluate the NAP
P, I
Coordination of Ministries responsible for the
management of water resources, to accelerate
responses
Establishment of regional water management services
to protect water resources with legal regulations
G, I, S
Definition of water availability and requirements,
drought watch system
I
Repair and renovation of irrigation networks. Water
recycling and drought prevention methods
G, I
Control of the quality of irrigation water
Ensuring the drainage and leaching requirements of
irrigated soils
G, S
G
I, G
G, I
p39 National Report Spain 2002
p5 NAP Portugal report 1999
Portugal Summary Report 2000
p15 Italy National Report 2002
p6 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p14 First National Report Greece
p11, p15 Greek National Action Plan, 2001
p20 National Report Spain 2002
p4 National Report Portugal, 2002
p12, p14 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p7 Second National Report Greece, 2002
Italian NAP 1999
p11 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p7 NAP Portugal report 1999
p16 Greek National Action Plan 2001
G
p11 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p7 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p38 Italy National Report 2002
p14 Greek National Action Plan 2001
G
p14 Greek National Action Plan 2001
G
G
p15 First National Report Greece 2000
p17 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p7, p24 Second National Report Greece,
2002
p16 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p7, p24 Second National Report Greece,
2002
p38 Italy National Report 2002
Italian NAP 1999
p16 NAP Portugal report 1999
p38 Italy National Report 2002
Italian NAP 1999
p17 NAP Portugal report 1999
p2 National Report Portugal 2002
p8 Italy National Report, 2002
Portugal Summary Report 2000
p3 National Report Portugal 2002
p29 Italy National Report 2002
p21 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p22 Italy National Report 2002
p21 National Report Spain 2002
p21 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p7, p25 Second National Report Greece,
2002
p39 Italy National Report 2002
Italian NAP 1999
p12 National Report of Italy 2001
p25 First National Report Greece
p11, p21 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p7, p25 Second National Report Greece,
2002
p39 Italy National Report 2002
Italian NAP 1999
p15, p21 Greek National Action Plan 2001
G
p15 Greek National Action Plan 2001
Construction of dams, reservoirs and artificial
recharging to control water distribution and combat
drought.
G, I
Improvement to the competitiveness of agriculture
Integrated social and environmental balance in the
countryside
G
G
p22 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p8, p12, p25 Second National Report
Greece, 2002
p39 Italy National Report 2002
Italian NAP 1999
p9 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p9 Second National Report Greece, 2002
P, I
G
44
Subsidies to young farmers and promotion of early
retirement, to decrease the average age of the rural
population
Promotion of agro-tourism in mountainous and
marginal lands
Encouragement of sustainable biological farming and
traditional knowledge
G
p9, p12 Second National Report Greece,
2002
G
Encouragement of young doctors to spend a year of
service in rural communities
Development of local agencies to apply and coordinate
policies and measures at local level
Application of the NAP in pilot areas with set targets
G
p12 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p12 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p9 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p8 National Report of Italy 2001
p9 Second National Report Greece, 2002
G
p10 Second National Report Greece, 2002
G, P
Evaluation of the 19 ANPA indicators of desertification
Reduction of agricultural pollution, especially nitrates,
to protect biodiversity
P
G
Mapping of threatened areas and their extent
G, I, S,P
Mapping of soils using units indicative of extent of
erosion, erosion risk, soil depth and soil drought risk
G, I
Further testing and use of the PESERA estimated
erosion rate model
Use of the media and workshops to promote public
awareness of desertification
G
p10 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p3 National Report Portugal, 2002
p4 National Report Portugal, 2002
p12, p19 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p10, p24 Second National Report Greece,
2002
p3, p8 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p8 Italy National Report, 2002
p16 National Report of Italy 2000
p41 National Report Spain 2002
p4 DISMED Spain 2001
p4 DISMED Portugal 2002
p13 NAP Portugal report 1999
p13 Second National Report Greece, 2002
p38 Italy National Report 2002
Italian NAP 1999
p16 National Report of Italy 2000
p17 Second National Report Greece, 2002
The Biological Animal Production Plan will protect
pastures from overgrazing
G
Banning of grazing in burned forests
Building data bases of changing land condition
G
S, I
Rehabilitation or restoration of threatened areas
S, I
Estimation of effectiveness of applied policy and
measures
Establishment of a network for monitoring, early
diagnosis and warning
G
G, I,P
p3 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p8, p15, p29 Italy National Report 2002
p2 DISMED Portugal 2002
p6 DISMED Spain 2001
Formulation and implementation of land use policy
Control of excessive pumping from coastal aquifers
Restoration of traditional knowledge and technology
Analysis and evaluation of existing legislation for the
environment
Proposing criteria for setting priorities for funding
actions to combat desertification
Establishment of clearing house mechanisms to share
and distribute information
Use of standard AGROVOC thesaurus keywords and
FAO classification methods
Analysis and evaluation of strategies to prevent and
combat desertification
Use of environmentally friendly technology
Legislation to prevent profiteering from unsustainable
short term land use practices
Recovery of degraded areas
Creation of centres to demonstrate good practice
Establishment of national and regional long-term
plans/policies for sustainable development
Improve water use efficiency and reduce waste,
G
G
I
I
p10 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p12 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p15 Italy National Report 2002
p18 Italy National Report 2002
I
p 42/43 Italy National Report 2002
I
p8 National Report of Italy 2000
I
p9 National Report of Italy 2000
I, G
G
G
p15 National Report of Italy 2000
p28 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p24 Greek National Action Plan 2001
p24 Greek National Action Plan 2001
P
P
Annex IV
p17 NAP Portugal report 1999
p17 NAP Portugal report 1999
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p6 Second Annex IV Report 2002
G, I
G, I
45
p14 First National Report Greece
p21, p24 Second National Report Greece,
2002
p15 National Report of Italy 2000
p12, p16, p20 Greek National Action Plan
2001
p21 Second National Report Greece 2002
p11 Greek National Action Plan 2001
SPAIN SURMODES website
p29 Italy National Report 2002
SPAIN SURMODES website
p39 Italy National Report 2002
p3 Greek National Action Plan 2001
including advisory systems
Irrigation practices and policies to minimise salinisation
and sustain water resources
Construction of dams, reservoirs and artificial
recharging to control water distribution and combat
drought.
Encouragement of sustainable biological farming and
traditional knowledge
Application of the NAP in pilot areas with set targets
Networking of pilot areas in Annex IV countries
Mapping of threatened areas using desertification
indicator models
Establishment of a Clearing House Mechanism for
Annex IV
Tillage systems to control erosion and surface crust
formation, minimise water loss and increase soil water
storage
Urban expansion across potentially productive or
environmentally important soils should be controlled
by planning measures
Planning of new settlement should avoid concentrated
urban zones and marginalised rural zones
Land use planning should be in harmony with water
use and management planning
Forest management to preserve and mitigate
desertification should be clarified
Long term continuous and accurate monitoring of
water resources
Mediterranean network database
Early warning systems for drought
Promotion of diversity and new opportunities in
affected areas
Promote synergies with other relevant programmes at
national and international levels
Aids to cultures that enrich the soil
Diversification of species used in afforestation
Scrubland management
Creation of water reservoirs
River protection
Reduction of overland flow
Better road network
Ethnic and cultural programmes
Commercialisation of regional produce
Rural and environmental tourism
Fiscal benefits and positive discrimination to enhance
quality of rural life
Provision of benefits to attract young people and
enterprises to rural life
Forest restoration, including biodiversity, vegetation
and soil conservation, with suitable technology and in
priority areas
More effective monitoring and assessment of
restoration projects to avoid failure or negative impacts
Aid packages for private land owners of land suitable
for restoration
Afforestation of semi arid marginal lands with fodder
resources
Increased research and technology transfer regarding
restoration techniques
Increase in water availability to civil and agricultural
use by purification and re-use
Increase in the quality of production and
competitiveness of agricultural products
Conversion of abandoned agricultural units to
agritourism facilities
Medium and long term economic and regional
planning
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
Annex IV
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p2 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p4 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p3 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p6 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p5 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
Annex IV
Annex IV
p6 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p6 Second Annex IV Report 2002
p6 Second Annex IV Report 2002
Annex IV
p6 Second Annex IV Report 2002
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
MEDRAP Report June 2002
P
MEDRAP Report June 2002
S
MEDRAP Report June 2002
S
MEDRAP Report June 2002
S
MEDRAP Report June 2002
S
MEDRAP Report June 2002
S
MEDRAP Report June 2002
I
MEDRAP Report June 2002
I
MEDRAP Report June 2002
I
MEDRAP Report June 2002
I
MEDRAP Report June 2002
46
Appendix 2: Reports of the National Committees to Combat Desertification to
the Second MEDRAP workshop "Identification of Sensitive Areas",
Tróia, Portugal, 6 to 8 June 2002
Consultation
of
stakeholders
Although the information from these reports is also shown in the table in Appendix 1,
the principal findings are given here, country by country to give a clearer impression of
the national pictures. These reports contain more recent developments in work done by
the National Committees, particularly relating to the consultation of stakeholders about
the problem and mitigation of desertification in their own locality, and about potential
solutions. They also contain further information about indicators which have been used
by the National Committees to map environmental sensitivity.
Portugal
The report summarises the results of the series of half day workshops held in four areas
of Portugal. Because the workshops were run jointly by the Focal Point and
DESERTLINKS the signs of desertification identified by the stakeholders have already
been listed above. However, this report also highlights the potential solutions that were
recognised by the stakeholders.
Relating to soils:
•
MINIMUM TILLAGE AND OTHER GOOD AGRICULTURAL PRACTICE
•
NATURAL GRAZING
•
AIDS TO CULTURES THAT ENRICH THE SOIL
•
SUITABLE LIVESTOCK DENSITY
•
DIVERSIFICATION OF SPECIES USED IN AFFORESTATION
•
SCRUBLAND MANAGEMENT
•
CREATION OF WATER RESERVOIRS
•
PREVENTION OF FOREST FIRES
•
USE OF TRADITIONAL PRACTICES
•
RIVER PROTECTION
•
REDUCTION OF OVERLAND FLOW
Relating to the economy
•
BETTER ROAD NETWORK
•
ETHNOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL ITINERARIES
•
ORIGIN DENOMINATION PRODUCES
•
COMMERCIAL CONDITIONS TO REGIONAL PRODUCES
•
RURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL TOURISM
•
FISCAL BENEFITS
•
PROMOTION OF QUALITY OF LIFE
•
REQUALIFICATION OF URBAN AND RURAL CENTRES
•
BENEFITS TO SETTLE YOUNG PEOPLE
•
BENEFITS TO SETTLE ENTERPRISES
•
PUT INTO PRACTICE TO ATTEND THE INFORMATION OF PEOPLE LIVING ON VILLAGES
•
DIGNIFY THE WORK OF THOSE LIVING IN DEPRESSED AREAS
Spain
The Spanish report describes the results of a two phase consultation exercise with
stakeholders held in Madrid in 2001. In the first phase managers and policy makers from
national, regional and local administrations were involved and in the second phase
members of civil society.
The principal problems related to desertification were identified as:
•
SOIL EROSION
•
WILD FIRES
•
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY PRACTICES
47
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
EROSIVE CLIMATE CONDITIONS
SOIL ERODIBILITY
SOIL SALINISATION
OVER EXPLOITATION OF AQUIFERS
CONCENTRATION OF AGRICULTURE IN IRRIGATED AREAS
INVESTMENT IN IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE
POPULATION INFLOW.
AGRICULTURE AND STOCKBREEDING SYSTEMS
RAINFED CROPS ON STEEP AND MODERATE SLOPES
HETEROGENEOUS DISTRIBUTION OF LIVESTOCK DENSITY
OVER GRAZING
ABANDONMENT OF MARGINAL FARMING SYSTEMS
RAPID EXPANSION/CONTRACTION OF MARGINAL LAND IN RESPONSE TO MARKET CHANGES
INTENSIVE AGRICULTURE
LACK OF INVESTMENT ON CONSERVATION SYSTEMS
LITTORALISATION OF THE ECONOMY
Solutions to combat desertification included:
FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES TO AVOID SOIL
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DEGRADATION AFTER MARGINAL LAND ABANDONMENT
FOREST RESTORATION
INCREASE IN PLANT COVER
INCREASE IN DIVERSITY OF VEGETATION COVER
PREVENTION OF WILD FIRES
MAINTAINING SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION STRUCTURES
TARGET AREAS DEGRADED CLOSE TO OR BEYOND THEIR REGENERATION CAPACITY
EFFECTIVE MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF RESTORATION ACTIVITIES
EVALUATION OF PAST RESTORATION ACTIONS
AID SYSTEMS TO PRIVATE LAND OWNERS TO GAIN COOPERATION IN RESTORATION
AFFORESTATION WITH SUITABLE TECHNOLOGY AND IN PRIORITY AREAS
AFFORESTATION OF SEMIARID MARGINAL LANDS WITH FODDER RESOURCES
INCREASED RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER REGARDING RESTORATION
TECHNIQUES.
Greece
No mention is made in the report of a specific consultation exercise with stakeholders.
However the public and authorities generally understand desertification to mean.
•
THREAT AND CONSEQUENCES OF DROUGHT
•
SCARCITY OF FRESH WATER SUPPLY
Italy
In April 2002 the Italian National Committee held a consultation exercise with local
stakeholders in Licata, Sicily. Problems associated with desertification are perceived by
the stakeholders to be:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SCARCE WATER RESOURCES
PROGRESSIVE DECLINE IN ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
INADEQUATE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES
PROGRESSIVE SPECIALISATION IN AGRICULTURE
ABANDONMENT OF HILLY AREAS
LOW LEVELS OF COMPETITION BETWEEN EXTREMELY SPECIALISED COMPANIES
LACK OF MARKETING SUPPORT STRUCTURES
LOW QUALITY WATER RESOURCES
48
Solutions were seen to be:
•
INCREASE WATER AVAILABILITY TO CIVIL AND AGRICULTURAL USES BY PURIFICATION AND RE•
•
•
•
USE
RAISE THE QUALITY OF PRODUCTION AND COMPETITIVENESS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
CONVERSION OF ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL UNITS TO AGRITOURISM FACILITIES
ECONOMIC AND REGIONAL PLANNING MEDIUM TO LONG TERM
DEVELOPMENT OF CITIZEN AWARENESS AND PARTICIPATION
49
50
Appendix 3: DESERTLINKS "Desertification Enquiry" made of the general public
Survey of the
opinion of
the general
public of
desertification
The problem of desertification as perceived by the general public in affected
Mediterranean countries.
(Source: DESERTLINKS Desertification Enquiry designed by Roxo)
3
Beja
depopulation
lack of
employment
drought
Mertola
depopulation
advance of
deserts
deforestation
4
deforestation
drought
5
6
poor infrastructure
lack of water
7
desert advance
lack of water
lack of
employment
climate change
8
soil erosion
soil erosion
1
2
Agri
lack of water
drought
Guadalentín52
deforestation
lack of water
Lesvos
lack of water
drought
deforestation
drought
temperature
increase
climate change
fire
soil erosion
increase in
temperature
fire
desert advance
biodiversity loss
ozone layer
destruction
fire
aridity
desert advance
deforestation
destruction of
vegetation
soil and water
pollution
depopulation
Fifteen problems or issues were listed in the questionnaire and the respondents were
asked which of them they associated with desertification. The problems have been
ranked according to the frequency with which they were mentioned and the top eight
have been listed above. These problems are in the top eight in all four affected areas:
•
LACK OF WATER
•
DROUGHT
•
DEFORESTATION
However there is a clear difference between Portugal and the other three
•
DEPOPULATION and
•
LACK OF EMPLOYMENT
being the two highest rated problems in Portugal and
•
DROUGHT,
•
LACK OF WATER and
•
DEFORESTATION
being in the two highest-rated problems in Italy, Spain and Greece.
52 In the Guadalentín the survey was sent to both secondary schools and universities. The results given here
are for the two sets of replies combined. An additional question was included in the survey "How do you
think desertification is affecting the area?" to which the combined replies were
droughts, impoverished lands, desert, emigration
vegetation degradation
reduction in the quality of life
increase of temperatures
51
52
Appendix 4: Problems or signs of desertification as identified by groups of local
stakeholders at participatory workshops
Stakeholder
workshops
Portugal
As part of the work programme of the DESERTLINKS project, a series of workshops
were held in Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece in which between 20 and 60 local and
regional stakeholders discussed their concerns about desertification in their local area.
At a series of half day workshops held in four areas in Portugal53, groups of local
stakeholders were asked to identify the principal signs of desertification. In order of
decreasing importance these signs were
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
INADEQUATE AGRICULTURAL TECHNIQUES
POOR AND DEGRADED SOILS
REDUCTION OF BIODIVERSITY
LAND EROSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF RURAL SPACE
REDUCED ECONOMIC ATTRACTIVENESS
DEGRADATION OF VEGETATION
DEPOPULATION OF THE RURAL SPACE
AGEING OF THE POPULATION
ABANDONMENT OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
INADEQUATE AGRICULTURAL POLICIES
FIRES
LOW PRODUCTIVITY LAND
WATER RESOURCES
A large number of strategies to combat these problems were suggested in the
workshops, together with potential partners who could take part in them. These have
not been synthesised.
Italy
The Italian stakeholders identified the following concerns about desertification locally:
•
•
•
•
IMPOVERISHMENT AND DEGRADATION OF TERRITORIAL RESOURCES
− Reduction of available water resources (Env and Econ)
− Bad maintenance of pipelines (Inst)
− Decrease of land productivity (Econ)
− Less tourist attraction (opportunity or dangerous) (Econ)
− Increase of deforestation and fire risk
− Abandonment of traditional technologies and tacit knowledge (Econ)
CLIMATE CHANGE
INCREASE OF TERRITORIAL DISPARITY (COSTAL/INTERNAL (SOCIAL)
REDUCTION OF RURAL POPULATION
− Elderly of rural population
− Abandonment of agricultural land
− Ecosystem alteration due to the innovative agricultural technologies
− Demographic pressure
− Increase of social conflict for the use of natural resources, especially water
53 Source: "Public participation in the fight against desertification" Report on four participatory workshops
carried out between 5 April and 2 May 2002 in four pilot areas (Portuguese National Coordination
Committee of the National Action Programme to Combat Desertification in association with Universidade
Nova de Lisboa)
53
•
•
Spain
ABSENCE OF PERCEPTION OF THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF NATURAL RESOURCES
− Degradation and low quality of life (Env)
− Increase of the cost for services (especially transport) due to territorial
degradation (Econ)
− No integration of environmental variables in the territorial and sector policies
and/or missing of integrated approach from the policy makers (Inst)
− Development policies (for the agricultural sector) not responding to the local
peculiarities (Inst)
− Absence of controls on the results of public founds
ABSENCE OF TERRITORIAL NETWORK ABLE TO MANAGE THE PHENOMENA THAT IS
CAUSE/EFFECT OF WEAKNESS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL (INST)
The local stakeholder workshop in the Guadalentín concluded that soil resources are
running out in the area. Even though this is identified as a very severe problem, it is not
considered a priority at a political level. Two agricultural systems exist in the
Guadalentín basin and they are related to two different kinds of sensitivity to the
environment: intensive farming, consuming resources and being very aggressive to the
environment; and dry farming which is more and more marginal. The perceptions of the
stakeholders to the origin of the problem (not in order of importance) were:
•
SOIL RESOURCE IS NOT PROPERLY VALUED
•
SLOPING SOILS ARE PLOUGHED
•
EXISTENCE OF A VERY INTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL SYSTEM
•
THE IDEA OF MULTIFUNCTIONAL AGRICULTURE DOES NOT WORK IN THE GUADALENTÍN
•
LACK OF SOIL PROTECTION MEASURES BY THE ADMINISTRATION
•
CULTURE OF NEW AGRICULTURE BASED ON IRRIGATION AND EASY MONEY
•
TECHNICIANS AND MANAGERS DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT
DESERTIFICATION
•
THE TWO SYSTEMS OF DRY AND IRRIGATED FARMING LEADS TO A FRAGMENTATION OF THE
TERRITORY
•
OVERGRAZING
•
NEW CULTIVATION ON SLOPING OR FORESTED SOILS
•
INTENSIFICATION OF DRY FARMING
•
NOT ENOUGH QUALITY IN DRY FARMING PRODUCTION
•
"MENTAL DESERTIFICATION"
The stakeholders' perception of the signs and consequences of desertification (not listed
in order of importance) were:
•
LOSS IN CROP PRODUCTION
•
LOSS OF WATER QUALITY
•
NEW IRRIGATION CULTURES ON DRY FARMING AREAS
•
DISAPPEARANCE OF SPRINGS
•
DEPOPULATION AND POPULATION MOVEMENTS IN RURAL AREAS
•
DEGRADATION OF ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL LAND
Greece
The results obtained from: (a) the questionnaire filled in collaboration with the local
land users, (b) the workshop organized in the island of Lesvos showed that the main
impacts of desertification in the island are related to loss of land productivity and farm
income. Specifically the main impacts of desertification in the island of Lesvos, in a
decreasing order of importance are the following:
•
LOSS IN AGRICULTURAL CROP PRODUCTION
•
LOSS IN FARM INCOME
•
ABANDONMENT OF AGRICULTURAL AREAS
54
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
LOSS IN WATER RESOURCES
INCREASE OF IMPORTED ANIMAL FEED
INCREASE OF PASTURE FIRES
LOSS OF SOIL RESOURCES
LOSS IN BIODIVERSITY
SALINIZATION OF LOWLAND
FLOODING OF LOWLAND AND SEDIMENTATION
55
56
Appendix 5: List of desertification related issues affecting Mediterranean Europe
as identified by the UNCCD, national Focal Points and national
and local stakeholders
Theme
Sub-theme
Specific example of
issue/problem/solution
Source
Country
Themes recognised by most stakeholder
groups
LAND
ABANDONMENT
agricultural areas
hilly areas
marginal land
AGRICULTURAL
CULTIVATION
TECHNIQUES AND
PRACTICES
abandonment of agricultural areas Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
abandonment of agricultural land Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
degradation of abandoned
Stakeholder
agricultural land
workshop report
2002
abandonment of hilly areas
National Action
Programme
abandonment of hilly areas
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Greece
abandonment of marginal farming
systems
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
Portugal
Spain
Combined
Italy
abandonment, land
Text of UNCCD
general
historical
settlements
abandonment of marginal lands
and historical settlements
National Action
Programme
Combined
soil and water
conservation
abandonment of marginal farming
systems, with consequent
degradation of traditional soil and
water conservation systems
National Action
Programme
Combined
suitability of
agricultural and
forestry practices
agricultural and forestry practices
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
agriculture and stockbreeding
systems
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
soil factors
water storage
agricultural techniques, inadequate Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
PAC, multifunctional agriculture,
Stakeholder
does not work in the Guadalentín workshop report
2002
dry and irrigated farming systems Stakeholder
lead to fragmentation of the
workshop report
territory
2002
new cultivation of sloping or
Stakeholder
forested soils
workshop report
2002
insufficient quality in dry farming
Stakeholder
methods
workshop report
2002
soil loss, compaction, or reduction National Action
of soil organic matter resulting in
Programme
land degradation
Portugal
preparation of Codes of Good
National Action
Agricultural Practice with subsidies Programme
for those who conform
Combined
reduction of soil water loss and
increase of soil water storage by
using best practice cultivation
measures, such as mulching, or
minimum tillage
Combined
57
National Action
Programme
Spain
Spain
Spain
Spain
Combined
crusting and
erosion
small stones and gravel on the soil National Action
surface should not be removed as Programme
they reduce evaporation losses
Combined
control of surface crusting and
erosion
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
aids to cultures that enrich the soil National Action
Programme
Combined
agricultural policies, inadequate
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
land suitable for restoration is often National Action
not in public hands and coProgramme
operation with private landowners
may be lacking
agriculture intensive
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Portugal
intensive agricultural system
Spain
sustainable
encouragement of sustainable
biological methods biological farming and traditional
knowledge and technology
policies
intensive
techniques
intensification of dry farming
irrigation
specialisation
PRODUCTIVITY LOSS traditional
agriculture
livestock
crops
BIODIVERSITY LOSS biodiversity
reduction
agriculture, concentration in
irrigated areas
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Combined
Spain
Spain
Spain
ensuring the drainage and leaching National Action
requirements of irrigated soils
Programme
Combined
agriculture, progressive
specialisation in
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Italy
progressive specialisation in
agriculture
National Action
Programme
Combined
agriculture, traditional, loss of
productivity
National Report 2000 Italy
animal feed, Increase of imported
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
production, Loss in agricultural crop Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
productivity, low land
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
loss of crop production
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Greece
biodiversity, loss in
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Greece
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Italy
loss of economic productivity of
traditional agriculture
National Action
Programme
Combined
economy, reduced attractiveness
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Portugal
biodiversity, reduction of
ECONOMIC ACTIVITY progressive decline economic activity, progressive
in traditional
decline in
agriculture
58
Greece
Portugal
Spain
Portugal
reduced farm
income
income, Loss in farm
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
inadequate
lack of development of new
National Action
development of new economic measures for sustainable Programme
activities
agriculture
economic activity, inadequate
development of new
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
benefits, subsidies fiscal benefits and positive
National Action
and aid packages discrimination to enhance quality of Programme
rural life
Combined
Italy
Combined
provision of benefits to attract
young people and enterprises to
rural life
subsidies to young farmers and
promotion of early retirement, to
decrease the average age of the
rural working population
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
exploitation of
resources
aid packages for private land
owners of land suitable for
restoration
over-exploitation of soil and water
resources linked to financial
investment
investment, overexploitation of soil
and water resources
soil erosion
erosion, land
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
investment in
irrigation
SOIL EROSION
Greece
erosion, soil
water and wind
erosion
erodibility
National Report 2002 Italy
Portugal
Spain
soil erosion by water and wind
National Action
limits the rootable depth of the soil Programme
Combined
overland flow and surface water
National Action
run-off are increased by reduced
Programme
soil water retention, where soil has
been eroded or affected physically
Combined
effective water erosion control
National Action
Programme
National Action
Programme
Combined
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
Text of UNCCD
general
further testing and use of the
PESERA estimated erosion rate
model
erodibility, soil
soil, poor, highly erodible
degradation factors land degradation
soil organic matter content,
depletion of
soil resources, Loss of
soil, poor and degraded
soil resource not properly valued
National Report 2000 Italy
National Report 2000 Italy
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
National Report 2000
deforestation
deforestation causing soil erosion
fire
soil erosion is accelerated by forest National Action
fires, extreme precipitation on
Programme
steep slopes and overgrazing, and
agricultural practices that result in
the removal of vegetation cover
59
Combined
Greece
Portugal
Spain
Greece
Combined
FIRE
forest fire
fire
fire, forest loss
fire, wild
pasture fire
effects on soils
WATER RESOURCES water availability
management of
water resources
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
general
National Report 2000 Italy
fires, forest
National Report 2000 Greece
fires, forest
National Report 2000 Portugal
fire, increase of pasture
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
damage to the land surface by fire National Action
frequency and extent
Programme
Greece
banning of grazing in burned
forests
National Action
Programme
Combined
water resources
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Portugal
scarcity of freshwater supplies
National Action
Programme
Combined
disappearance of springs
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
National Action
Programme
Spain
water resources, scarce
groundwater over
exploitation
Portugal
fires, forest
water resources, loss in
water quality
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Text of UNCCD
Combined
Greece
Italy
establishment of regional water
management services to protect
water resources with legal
regulations
water resources, low quality water FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Combined
low quality water resources
National Action
Programme
Combined
loss of water quality
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Spain
groundwater, over exploitation of
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
groundwater, overexploitation of
National Report 2000 Italy
over-exploitation of water
resources
water resources, unsustainable
exploitation of
National Report 2000 Greece
Text of UNCCD
Italy
general
management of water resources, National Action
including aquifer resources and sea Programme
water intrusion, is lacking
Combined
over-exploitation of groundwater
aquifers, including over-pumping
for irrigation
National Action
Programme
Combined
control of excessive pumping from National Action
coastal aquifers
Programme
Combined
coordination of ministries
National Action
responsible for the management of Programme
water resources, to accelerate
responses
river protection
National Action
Programme
Combined
improve water use efficiency and
reduce waste
Combined
60
National Action
Programme
Combined
create water advisory agencies
POPULATION
CHANGES
National Action
Programme
Combined
increase water availability to civil
and agricultural use by purification
and re-use
drought prevention water recycling and drought
prevention methods
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
ageing population
population, ageing of the
rural depopulation
rural depopulation
Stakeholder
Portugal
workshop report
2002
Stakeholder
Portugal
workshop report
2002
National Report 2000 Portugal
rural depopulation
depopulation, migration
National Action
Programme
depopulation and population
movement in rural areas
FLOODING
Combined
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
encouragement of young doctors to National Action
spend a year of service in rural
Programme
communities
Spain
ethnic and cultural programmes
National Action
Programme
Combined
inflow
strong investment and population
inflow to irrigated areas where
water consumption exceeds
sustainable availability
National Action
Programme
Combined
flooding and
sedimentation
flooding of lowland and
sedimentation
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Greece
Combined
Themes which tended to be recognised by the National committees rather than the stakeholder
groups
CLIMATIC
CONDITIONS
low rainfall
National Report 2000 Italy
rainfall, natural deficit
National Report 2000 Greece
threat and consequences of
drought
National Action
Programme
Combined
rainfall, high variability
Text of UNCCD
general
variability of rainfall
National Action
Programme
Combined
extreme events
climate conditions, erosive
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
rainfall, extreme
National Report 2000 Italy
trends in rainfall
climatic stress: drought, dryness,
decline in water reserves
National Action
Programme
Combined
drought
tendency towards reduction of
annual rainfall
National Action
Programme
Combined
maintenance of
conservation
structures
conservation structures,
deterioration of soil and water
Text of UNCCD
general
rainfall variability
SOIL AND WATER
CONSERVATION
STRUCTURES
rainfall, low
existing soil and water conservation National Action
structures are not being maintained Programme
Combined
recovery and reconstruction of
National Action
terraces on sloping land to reduce Programme
soil erosion and enhance water
storage
Combined
61
investment
IRRIGATION
irrigation methods
Spain
construction of dams, reservoirs
and artificial recharging to control
water distribution and combat
drought
National Action
Programme
Combined
concentration of agriculture in
irrigated areas
National Action
Programme
Combined
repair and renovation of irrigation
networks
National Action
Programme
Combined
Spain
salinisation
irrigation practices and policies to
minimise salinisation and sustain
water resources
National Action
Programme
Combined
deforestation
deforestation, causing soil erosion National Action
Programme
Combined
forest damage by
drought
drought, damage to forests
Spain
FORESTRY ACTIVITY forestry
management
forestry
responsibility
over-exploitation
forestry methods
DISMED, Florence
2001
Spain
Combined
clarification of management
National Action
methods to mitigate desertification Programme
Combined
control of land clearance and
deforestation that leaves areas
prone to erosion
National Action
Programme
Combined
more effective monitoring and
National Action
assessment of restoration projects Programme
to avoid failure or negative impacts
Combined
clarification of forest-land
ownership
National Action
Programme
Combined
forestry activity
National Report 2000 Portugal
forest resources, over-exploitation National Report 2000 Greece
of
sustainable management and
National Action
Combined
expansion of forest areas
Programme
forest restoration with suitable
technology in priority areas
National Action
Programme
Combined
diversification of species used in
afforestation
National Action
Programme
Combined
afforestation of semi-arid marginal National Action
lands with fodder resources
Programme
Combined
reforestation of burned forest
National Action
Programme
Combined
improved management to reduce
fire risk
National Action
Programme
Combined
drought
damage to forests by drought
National Action
Programme
Combined
distribution of
grazing density
grazing, livestock, heterogeneous
distribution of density
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
overgrazing
over grazing
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
overgrazing
National Report 2000 Italy
biodiversity in
forests
fire
GRAZING ACTIVITY
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
culture of new agriculture based on Stakeholder
irrigation and easy money
workshop report
2002
new irrigation cultivation in dry
Stakeholder
farming areas
workshop report
2002
control of the quality of irrigation
National Action
water
Programme
water quality
DEFORESTATION
conservation systems, lack of
investment
62
overgrazing
National Report 2000 Greece
overgrazing, grazing
National Report 2000 Italy
overgrazing
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
National Action
Programme
scrubland management
husbandry
practices
LITTORALISATION
economic factors
negative side-effects of the CAP for National Action
stockbreeding causing overgrazing Programme
and soil erosion
Combined
economic factors
littoralisation of the economy
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
littoralisation
National Report 2000 Portugal
rapid land use
changes
lack of marketing
policies
low competition
POLLUTION
Combined
plans such as the Greek Biological National Action
Combined
Animal Production Plan will protect Programme
pastures form overgrazing and
erosion
husbandry
National Report 2000 Portugal
irrigated agriculture littoralisation, including irrigated
agriculture
COMPETITION AND
MARKETING
Spain
acidification
Text of UNCCD
general
inter-basin water transfers
National Action
established in National
Programme
Hydrological Plans may encourager
direction of population and
investment to littoral and irrigated
areas where consumption of
resources may be unsustainable
and contribute to abandonment of
inland cropping areas
Combined
marginal land, rapid
expansion/contraction of in
response to market changes
rapid changes in market and
agricultural policies contribute to
lack of investment in marginal
lands
misuse of technology to increase
short term yields on marginal lands
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
legislation to prevent profiteering
National Action
from unsustainable short term land Programme
use practices
Combined
lack of new policies to
counterbalance effects of market
globalisation
marketing support, lack of
structures
National Report 2000 Italy
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Italy
lack of policies to combat adverse National Action
agricultural market effects
Programme
Combined
promotion of diversity and new
opportunities in affected areas
National Action
Programme
Combined
increase in the quality of production National Action
and competitiveness of regional
Programme
agricultural products
Combined
competition, low levels between
extremely specialised companies
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2002
Italy
improvement to the
competitiveness of agriculture
National Action
Programme
Combined
acidification
National Action
Programme
Greece
63
chemical pollution
PLANNING
SALINISATION
rural planning
pollution, chemical
National Report 2002 Italy
pollution, chemical
National Action
Programme
control of agricultural pollution.
National Action
especially nitrate pollution of
Programme
groundwater, to protect biodiversity
Combined
planning and management of rural Stakeholder
space
workshop report
2002
integrated social and environmental National Action
balance in the countryside
Programme
Portugal
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
urbanisation
National Report 2000 Greece
salinisation of soil
unplanned building
urbanisation
National Report 2000 Italy
urbanisation
National Report 2000 Portugal
planning of new settlement should National Action
avoid concentrated urban zones
Programme
and marginalized rural zones
Combined
urban expansion across potentially National Action
productive or environmentally
Programme
important soils should be controlled
by planning measures
Combined
salinisation
National Report 2000 Italy
salinisation
National Report 2000 Greece
salinisation, soil
FP Stakeholder
consultation 2001
Spain
salinization of lowland
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
National Action
Programme
Greece
intensive cultivation slopes, intensive cultivation of
slopes, steep
Text of UNCCD
steep slopes are ploughed
unplanned
development
Combined
National Report 2000 Greece
cultivation of steep slopes, rainfed crops on steep and FP Stakeholder
slopes
moderate
consultation 2001
TOURISM
Combined
integrated planning land use planning should be in
harmony with water use and
management planning
better road network
control of soil salinisation
SLOPES
Greece
Spain
general
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
steep slopes increase the threat of National Action
soil erosion especially in
Programme
conjunction with extreme rainfall
and unsuitable agricultural crops or
practices
severe erosion on steep south and National Action
south-east exposed slopes
Programme
Spain
protection of steep slopes from soil National Action
erosion, e.g. as subsidised setProgramme
aside land
Combined
tourism
Combined
Combined
National Report 2000 Portugal
unplanned development of tourism National Report 2000 Greece
promotion of agro- promotion of agro-tourism in
tourism
mountainous and marginal lands
64
National Action
Programme
Combined
VEGETATION
removal for
agricultural
expansion
degradation of
cover
PUBLIC AWARENESS lack of public and
technical
awareness
conversion of abandoned
agricultural units to agri-tourism
facilities
National Action
Programme
vegetation cover, degradation of
through agricultural expansion
National Report 2002 Italy
vegetation cover, degradation of
through agricultural expansion
National Action
Programme
Greece
vegetation, degradation of
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
Portugal
public awareness of desertification, National Report 2002 Greece
lack of
technicians and managers do not
have enough knowledge about
desertification
initial enthusiasm reduced by
inactivity
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
National Action
Programme
Spain
"mental desertification"
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
National Action
Programme
Spain
use of the media and workshops,
such as EASW workshops in pilot
areas, to increase awareness and
enthusiasm
specialist courses at universities
and research centres
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
copies of the National Action
Programme can be sent to all
universities
National Action
Programme
Combined
creation of a National Coordinating National Action
Body to implement and evaluate
Programme
the National Action Programme
Combined
lack of compatible standards and
systems between countries
National Action
Programme
Combined
lack of specific funding for the
implementation of the convention
National Action
Programme
Combined
proposal of criteria for setting
priorities for funding actions to
combat desertification
National Action
Programme
Combined
application of the National Action
Programme in pilot areas with set
targets
networking of pilot areas in Annex
IV countries
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
creation of centres to demonstrate National Action
good practice
Programme
Combined
establishment of national and
regional plans/policies for
sustainable development
National Action
Programme
Combined
short-term perspectives and use of
technology do not support
sustainability
medium and long term economic
and regional planning
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
promote synergies with other
relevant programmes at national
and international levels
INSTITUTIONAL
ORGANISATION
implementation of
the CCD
policies to combat
desertification
Combined
65
Combined
Combined
analysis and evaluation of
strategies to prevent and combat
desertification
formulation and implementation of
land use policy
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
development of local agencies to National Action
apply and co-ordinate policies and Programme
measures at local level
Combined
estimation of effectiveness of
applied policy and measures
Combined
National Action
Programme
insufficient administrative effort to
develop soil protection measures
funding to combat
desertification
devolution of
responsibility
MAPPING AND
MONITORING
mapping
desertification
requirements for
indicators
monitoring
data bases
early warning
Stakeholder
workshop report
2002
ensuring necessary funding for the National Action
application of measures
Programme
Spain
ensuring a response to natural and National Action
man-made water shortage
Programme
Combined
use of environmentally friendly
technology
National Action
Programme
Combined
transfer of jurisdiction and
responsibility over environmental
policies from national to regional or
local scales
analysis and evaluation of existing
legislation for the environment
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
mapping of the extent of threatened National Action
areas
Programme
Combined
mapping threatened areas using
desertification indicator models
National Action
Programme
Combined
mapping of soils using units
indicative of the extent of erosion,
erosion risk, soil depth and soil
drought risk
lack of desertification indicators of
a socio-economic nature
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
evaluation of the 19 ANPA
indicators of desertification
National Action
Programme
Combined
lack of information on the evolution National Action
of desertification
Programme
Combined
organisation of information
collection, analysis and
dissemination, on a Mediterranean
scale, i.e. a Clearing House
mechanism
monitoring land degradation status
over large areas using objective
and low cost methods
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
long term continuous and accurate National Action
monitoring of water resources
Programme
Combined
use of AGROVOC thesaurus
keywords and FAO classification
methods
building data bases of changing
land condition
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
establishment of a network for
monitoring, early diagnosis and
warning (especially for drought)
National Action
Programme
Combined
definition of water availability and
requirements, in a drought watch
system
National Action
Programme
Combined
66
Combined
methods for forecasting
desertification under chosen
climatic and socio-economic
scenarios
reversible and non- discrimination between current and
reversible
relict desertification, or reversible
desertification
and non-reversible desertification
research
National Action
Programme
Combined
National Action
Programme
Combined
research programmes on a national National Action
scale, including restoration
Programme
techniques
Combined
67
68
Appendix 6: The indicator Data Base classification framework54
The
classification
framework
Indicator
Data Base
classification
framework
A framework composed of five hierarchical levels is proposed, corresponding to
indicator classification criteria. They provide an answer to the questions “what is it for”,
“at what scale does it apply”, “what kind of data is it based on”. The five classification
criteria are, in hierarchical order: Operational objectives; position within the DPSIR
framework; spatial scale and time scale; component of the environmental or socioeconomic system involved; type of data; and acquisition platform.
Criteria
Classes and relative codes
Operational
Objective
Position in the
DPSIR
framework
Scale
space
time
Component of the system
under consideration
Nature of data
prevention
monitoring
mitigation
P
Mo
Mi
driving force
pressure
state
impact
response
D
P
S
I
R
point
local
sub-region
region
P
L
Sr
R
European
Mediterr.
region
M
daily or more
monthly or
seasonal
annual
less than
annual
g
m
a
b
soil
water resources
vegetation
climate
S
W
V
C
data banks
B
direct gathering
F
remote sensing
RS
single
measuremen
t
s
socioeconomic
aspects
SE
For each of these criteria classes are indicated, identified by a capital letter in bold type.
For example an indicator of type (P,S,L,V,R) is an indicator for Prevention, of State,
applicable on a Local scale, referring to Vegetation, measurable by means of remotesensed data: if the indicator also requires data collected directly from the Field, then it
will not be R, but R/F and so on.
Please see Enne and Zucca, 200055 for a fuller description of the data base.
By Claudio Zucca and Giuseppe Enne
Enne, G. and Zucca, C. 2000. Desertification indicators for the European Mediterranean region: state of
the art and possible methodological approaches. ANPA, Roma and NRD, Sassari, 261 p
54
55
69
Appendix 7: Mapping Land Degradation risk in the Mediterranean at a
European scale. The PESERA- RDI model56
The PESERA-RDI model is currently being developed to provide a state of the art
assessment within the PESERA (Pan European Soil Erosion Assessment) EC Project, at a
European scale (Kirkby et al, 57). The model is based on a simple and conservative
erosion model, which is disaggregated into components, which depend on climate,
vegetation, topography and soil factors. The rate of sediment transport is estimated as a
mean soil loss (Tonnes/Ha), obtained as a product of the model components. As the
components are explicit, the impact of changes in land use or climate can also be clearly
identified, so that sensitivity to changed conditions can be explored. The model is
currently being applied at a 1 km resolution for the whole of Europe except for some
areas where some data is missing. With data at finer resolution, the model may be
applied at 250m or better resolution to areas of particular concern. There is also scope,
using globally available data sources, to apply the model world-wide at a resolution of
10km, although with some inevitable degradation of quality. The emphasis of the
PESERA-RDI model is the prediction of hillslope erosion, and the delivery of erosion
products to the base of each hillslope. Channel delivery processes and channel routing
are explicitly not considered.
Erosion predictions are reliant on estimating a stabilised vegetation cover and identifying
the generation of overland runoff on a cell by cell basis. The PESERA-RDI_GRID coarse
scale code distributes the point based model across the European grid generating a series
of physically based estimates of potential monthly erosion at a 1km x 1km grid
resolution for Europe.
Model
overview
Appropriate hydrological and cover conditions are obtained by running through the
monthly sequence of climate and agricultural calendars for each grid cell until the annual
cycle stabilises, through iteration of the GrowVeg routine in the model. The
equilibration process makes use of meteorological data derived from the MARS data set
(daily rainfall, rainfall statistics, PET, elevation adjusted mean temperature and mean
temperature range). Soil hydrological characteristics are derived from the European Soils
Database. Initial ground coverage is estimated from merging the land-use classifications
of the European Soil Database spatial coverage and typical values of percentage cover.
The stable hydrological and cover conditions are used to estimate the threshold daily
rainfall above which runoff and erosion occur. This threshold storage is obtained as a
weighted mean of the thresholds for vegetated and bare fractions of the ground surface
in each month. The total amount of runoff and erosion is then estimated by summing
across the frequency distribution of daily rainfalls, to derive the corresponding
distribution of daily runoff and erosion, and summing across these derived distributions
to obtain monthly totals. Sediment transport is estimated as the product of soil
erodibility with a power law function of runoff discharge and gradient. The erodibility is
primarily dependent on soil properties, but is also weighted with respect to the
stabilised vegetation cover.
Although sediment transport may, in principle, be estimated at every point within the
landscape, and is used in this way for calibration purposes against plot data, the
56
57
Contribution from M. Kirkby and B. Irvine, University of Leeds, [email protected]
Kirkby, M.J., Le Bissonais, Y., Coulthard, T.J., Daroussin, J. and McMahon, M.D., 2000. The
development of Land Quality Indicators for Soil Degradation by Water Erosion. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment.
70
particular form used for the sediment transport function allows the gradient term to be
simplified, for total sediment delivery to stream channels, to the simpler measure of
local relief, which can be estimated as the standard deviation of the elevation of
surrounding grid cells (The standard deviation of neighbouring cell is calculated from the
GTOPO30 European DEM). This measure has the advantage of being much more stable
than gradient estimates, as DEM resolution is changed, so that it is possible to obtain
good estimates using DEM with 1 km or 250m resolution.
The objectives of PESERA and preceding work have been to provide an indicator of soil
erosion risk at the regional scale, suitable for planning and policy for national and
continental areas. The indicator is expressed on a qualitative scale. The output is a
weighted average based on the expected long-term frequency of storms of all
magnitudes. The values cannot be regarded as forecasts due to uncertainty in storm
magnitude.
71
Appendix 8: Indicators from remote sensing58
Within the Mediterranean wide RDI concept remote sensing is used in two ways:
•
Input of remote sensing derived Mediterranean wide, monthly vegetation
cover over a time period of more than ten years to the RDI modelling of soil
erosion and salinisation risk covering the entire Mediterranean basin
•
Investigation of the time series towards the possible direct extraction of remote
sensing based indicators, which are relevant for the indicator system being
developed within DESERTLINKS
Remote sensing has been used in different ways to investigate in what way and to what
extent changing energy and water fluxes at the land surface – atmosphere interface are
related to assumed changed climatic forcing of desertification processes. This work has
resulted in advanced techniques to accurately derive standardised “primary” radiometric
variables (e.g. spectral reflectance, albedo, surface temperature, emissivity etc.) and to
analyse primarily the temporal behaviour of these variables in terms of changing energy,
momentum and mass exchange between land and atmosphere5960. Instead of this
“climatic” approach, DESERTLINKS is aiming more at the identification of changes of
physical land surface conditions in terms of vegetation cover and soil status. This
approach also requires the correct conversion of radiance registered by the remote
sensing sensor into primary physical variables as mentioned above (e.g. reflectance, land
surface temperature). Then the information on physical land surface status may be
derived both from remote sensing directly and through integration of remotely sensed
information with data from other sources within a complex modelling framework such
as the RDI models for Mediterranean wide risk of water erosion and salinisation.
The requirement of Regional Indicators is that they may be applied to the entire
Mediterranean basin at full coverage, giving a general overview at coarse scale in order
to identify areas where more detailed studies should be performed. They should also
have the potential to be regularly up-dated for monitoring purposes. This implies that at
this scale only the use of a coarse resolution/high revisit rate (1 to 3 days) remote sensing
system such as NOAA-AVHRR (1 to 8 km resolution), SPOT VEGETATION (1 km),
TERRA-MODIS (0.25 to 1 km) or MERIS (0.3 to 1 km) are realistic options. Although,
compared to the other systems, NOAA-AVHRR has a number of shortcomings in
radiometric and geometric accuracy, it is still a central element in the indicator
development and understanding of desertification processes. This is because it is the only
system having 20 years history of operation and thus is crucial to build the backbone of
the necessary long term, multi-temporal analyses and base-line building. The new
systems, nevertheless, assure together with the NOAA satellites data continuity and will
particularly allow clear improvements of geo-referencing in relation to ground
information and extended possibilities to derive information on vegetation and soil
status. As regards validation and calibration of regional scale indicators remote sensing
offers a strong potential for down-scaling from regional scale to target areas by
disaggregation of vegetation cover related information with the help of higher
Contribution from S. Sommer, EC-JRC, Ispra, [email protected]
Bolle, H.J., 1996: The Role of Remote Sensing in Understanding and Controlling Land Degradation and
Desertification Processes: The EFEDA Research Strategy. In: The use of remote sensing for land degradation
and desertification monitoring in the Mediterranean basin. EUR 16732 EN, Eds. J. Hill and D. Peter, pp4578.
60 RESMEDES 1998: Remote Sensing of Mediterranean desertification and environmental changes
(Resmedes). Final report ENV4-CT95-0094, EUR 18352 EN, Luxembourg. Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities ISBN 92-827-4040-4, 39 p.
58
59
72
resolution remote sensing data such as Landsat-TM and/or higher resolution thematic
data e.g. CORINE land cover. In particular, the approach to derive fractional vegetation
cover at different scales upon the basis of spectral mixture analysis (SMA) has shown that
vegetation cover has a fractal dimension which allows its comparison in different scales.
Although, the dominant factors controlling e.g. patterns of vegetation change at the
different scales, the scientific rationale of comparison could be given in applying
concepts of ecosystem resilience during given time periods, which are covered both by
available coarse resolution and high resolution satellite data over the DESERTLINKS
target areas.
73
Appendix 9: Expert System for evaluating the Environmental Sensitivity
Index (ESI) for a local area61
A comprehensive system has been developed to evaluate and investigate the
causes and responses that contribute to the Environmental Sensitivity to
desertification of each fundamental land unit describing an Environmentally
Sensitive Area (ESA)62. The coverage of the scheme ranges from the local to
basin-wide scales. The system presented here is an updated version of a
functional subset of this system, with low data requirements, presented as a webbased tool to enable the Environmental Sensitivity Index to be determined for
individual areas. In the system data from many different sources, such as
qualitative and quantitative satellite radiometric measurements, available
geographical data, and ad hoc ground surveys, can be integrated.
The Environmental Degradation or Sensitivity of an area to desertification is a
complex concept to rationalise since, depending on the context, it can be caused
by many different factors operating in isolation or in association63. An
Environmental Sensitive Area (ESA) can be considered, in general, as a specific
and delimited entity in which environmental and socio-economical factors are
not balanced or are not sustainable for that particular environment. The
Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) to degradation or desertification of an area
can also be seen as the result of the interactions among elementary factors
(information layers) that are differently linked to direct and indirect degradation
or desertification phenomena64. Severe, irreversible environmental degradation
phenomena, for example, could result from a combination of poor management
quality together with various combinations of critical environmental factors (soil,
climate, and vegetation). In order to make informed decisions it is necessary to
be able to characterise and identify the significant factors, which produce critical
situations. As these factors are rarely independent, it is also necessary to be able
to establish their interrelationships so that their relative contributions can be
determined. On the other hand decision makers require functional summaries
highlighting major issues; the straightforward identification of sensitive areas
irrespective of source; and the ability to determine the effect of remedial actions
without recourse to the intricacies of the scientific background.
In terms of the data required for estimating the Environmental Sensitivity to
desertification, three different primary types of information are essential:
physical-structural; vegetal; socio-economic. The groups are not necessarily
Contribution from A. Ferrara, University of Basilicata, [email protected]
Kosmas C., Ferrara A., Briasouli H., Imeson A. 1999. Methodology for mapping Environmentally Sensitive
Areas (ESAs) to Desertification. In 'The Medalus project Mediterranean desertification and land use. Manual
on key indicators of desertification and mapping environmentally sensitive areas to desertification. Edited
by: C. Kosmas, M.Kirkby, N.Geeson. European Union 18882. pp:31-47 ISBN 92-828-6349-2
Ferrara A., Bellotti A., Faretta S., Mancino G., Taberner M., 1999. Identification and assessment of
Environmentally Sensitive Areas by Remote Sensing. MEDALUS III 2.6.2. OU Final Report. King's College,
London. Volume 2: 397-429
63 UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme), 1992. World Atlas of Desertification.
Edward Arnold, Sevenoaks.
Thornes J.B., 1995. Mediterranean desertification and the vegetation cover. In EUR 15415 - "Desertification
in a European context: Physical and socio-economic aspects", edited by R.Fantechi, D.Peter, P.Balabanis, J.L.
Rubio. Brussels, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. 169-194.
64 Basso F, Bove, E, Dumontet S, Ferrara A, Pisante M, Quaranta G, Taberner M. 2000. Evaluating
Environmental Sensitivity at the basin scale through the use of Geographic Inforamtion Systems and
Remote Sensed data: an example covering the Agri basin (southern Italy). Catena 40:19-35.
61
62
74
independent: remote sensed radiometric data, a potential vegetation map, or a
phytoclimatic one, are all influenced by diverse factors arising from each context.
The data can be obtained from available documents, or obtained in the field.
They can be nominal (e.g. crop data, types of crops, and forms of tillage
systems), presence or absence, ordinal, discrete (e.g. pedological system, soil
water, or organic matter content), or continuous (e.g. information provided by
digital elevation models or land surveys) to name but a few. The complexity of
the information is related to the sophistication of the questions that have to be
answered, yet the combination of complex data and complex questions means
that the data has to be analysed in an integrated way to extract succinct, and
well founded, answers.
Three essential considerations were taken into account when selecting the
information layers (see table below):
-
their correlation to degradation phenomena or environmental
critical state;
coverage;
ease and economy of updating.
Layers can be added when there is a requirement to study specific aspects or
areas in greater detail, layers can be removed when a first approximation of an
ES estimate is required and all the desired information is not available over the
area of interest. For flexibility and development purposes, the indicators present
in the system can be divided into three main categories:
Required, to perform an accurate estimate of the ESI with a minimum
information set;
Optional, to have an optimised estimate of the ESI or for particular reference to
non-standard and unique factors;
Additional, to analyse particular aspects of the area.
Optimised set of
information
layers used in
evaluating ES to
desertification
and their related
sources
Quality
Layer
Soil
Parent material, Rock Fragments, Published data at
Soil Depth, Slope Angle, Drainage, various scales and
field samplings
Soil Texture
Climate
Aridity
(Bagnouls and Gaussen)
Vegetation
Rainfall,
Source
Aspect,
index Published data at
various
scales,
field
samplings
and DEM
Fire
risk,
Erosion
protection, Landsat
TM,
Drought resistance, Plant cover
published data at
various scales and
field samplings
Management Policy enforcements,
intensity
Land
use Statistical
data,
mainly
at
municipality level
(*) Optional layers (chosen for this preliminary version of the tool) are
written in italic
75
Soil is a crucial factor in evaluating the Environmental Sensitivity of an
ecosystem, especially in the arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid zones. Soil
properties related to desertification and degradation phenomena particularly
affect water storage and retention capacity, and erosion resistance.
Climate quality is assessed on the basis of how it influences water availability to
the plants. Consideration has been given to the amount of rainfall, air
temperature and aridity. In particular the selected layers are: Annual
precipitation (a crucial parameter in plant growth); Bagnouls-Gaussen aridity
index (a synthesis of precipitation, evapotranspiration and run-off information);
Slope aspect (affects microclimatic conditions and erosion).
Vegetation plays an important role in mitigating the effects of desertification and
degradation phenomena. The vegetation quality was assessed in terms of: Fire
risk and regenerative ability (affects land degradation, soil erosion rates and
biodiversity losses); Soil erosion protection (an important factor in controlling
the intensity and the frequency of overland flow and erosion); Drought
resistance (the capability of an ecosystem to adapt to, or resist, aridity and long
droughts ); Plant cover (to reduce runoff and sediment loss).
Management layers relate to land use intensity and sustainability. Indicators
affecting management quality are related to cultivation of the land (implements
used, ploughing depth, direction of cultivation, etc.), overuse of shallow soils,
grazing density, terracing of land and maintenance of terraces, irrigation, (water
quality and soil water availability), etc.
For all layers, (including soil, climate, vegetation, management) the component
classes have a calculated score, between 1.0 and 2.0, as in the table below, which
is then used in the statistical calculation of the ESI.
Example of
classes and
relative scores
used for
management
layers
Layer
Classes
Scores
Land use intensity
Low
(Sustainable) 1
Medium
(~
Sustainable) 1.5
High (Not sustainable)
2
Policy enforcement
complete
partial
incomplete (<25%)
(>75%) 1
(25-75%) 1.5
2
The quantification of different Environmental Sensitivity (ES) levels at the basin
scale can be carried out by evaluating the overall influence that single
information layers have on the phenomena under study.65 The goal was to
develop a system which would function irrespective of the number and type of
information layers at its most primitive level. This is achieved by adopting a two
stage approach as illustrated in the figure below. In the first stage, in this case,
the four single quality layers are first determined from the basic data layers and
65 Ferrara A, Belloti A, Faretta S, Mancino G, Taberner M, 1999. Identification and assessment of
environmentally sensitive areas by remote sensing. MEDALUS III 2.6.2 OU Final Report. King’s College
London Volume 2: 397-429.
76
in the second phase the final sensitivity of an area is evaluated from the quality
layers.
Scheme of
the ESI
estimate
Each elementary unit in each Quality Layer is estimated as the geometric
mean of its own sub-layers:
Quality_x ij = (layer_1 ij * layer_2 ij * layer_3 ij * ...... * layer_n
ij) (1/n) [1]
where:
i,j = rows and columns of a single elementary land unit of each layer;
n = number of layers used
The first level, that of the basic data layers, isolates the rest of the system
from the details of the data. The quality layer, level 2, acts as a buffer
between the level 1 data layers and the derived ESA layer, level 3. The
weight of each quality layer is equivalent so, as with the level 1
components, the results are comparable amongst the layers and the
constituents of a particular layer are hidden from the rest of the system.
This approach allows the overall abstract "quality" themes (or contexts:
soil, climate, vegetation and management), which make up each quality
layer, to be developed independently and without changing the structure
of the overall methodology. With the four qualities obtained from the
above, the ES is estimated by:
ES ij = (Quality_1 ij * Quality _2 ij * Quality _3 ij * Quality _4 ij)
[2]
(1/4)
where:
i,j = rows and columns of a single elementary land unit of each quality;
Quality_nij = computed values
The outlined structure gives equal weights to each level_1 layer when
computing each quality (e.g. soil texture has the same weight as other soil
layers) and equal weights to each quality in level_2 when computing the
final ES irrespective of the number of contributing level 1 layers; i.e. a
single climate parameter has, in this case, a higher influence than a single
77
soil parameter. By doing this, the higher level computations in the model
are unaffected by the number of level 1 layers; this means that a
component of the quality layer is not penalised because it does not have
many information layers, nor is it exaggerated if it is well specified with
many layers.
One of the most important aspects of the system is that the ES classes are
not directly linked to an absolute value of sensitivity but are related
indirectly, and relatively, through scores that define different levels of
sensitivity, for different parameters, for a particular area. As a result,
sensitivity calculated at the top layer imposes a common framework on
the components of an area. The elements, which are grouped into broad
categories, can be thus investigated and characterised in a different phase
by other analyses. For example, the effects of different kinds of
intervention on the sensitivity can be estimated by simulating the
different intervention options (e.g. recovering the functionality of
degraded deciduous forest versus the conversion of conifer stands into
more efficient deciduous forests) or it is possible to identify critical factors
by applying a simple cluster analysis to areas with high sensitivity values
at the municipality level.66
The system can draw on diverse data yet is efficient; it can be used to
analyse the environmental system intensively; it enables the current state
of, and changes to, the environment to be accurately and quickly
assessed; and, by identifying critical factors, it helps to define and identify
the most beneficial strategies that could be introduced to reduce the
sensitivity of a given area. The use of cross analysis techniques, applied to
pre-existing information with other ad hoc data collected as necessary,
can also be used to investigate specific degradation or environmental
sensitivity phenomena easily and effectively. Furthermore, this approach
not only allows the identification of different degrees of environmental
sensitivity but, at the same time, allows us to investigate the factors that
cause the evolution as they happen.
Finally it must be emphasised that the main reason for this Environmental
Sensitivity Evaluation Model is to define a reference framework to be
used in analysing various situations within the Mediterranean
Environment under the following operational constraints:
•
the system must be reasonably simple to establish, robust in operation,
and widely applicable;
•
the selection of the information layers is made, not only on the basis of
their actual information content (i.e. their relationship with the
phenomena under study), but also as a function of our ability to obtain
and update the data with ease and economy;
Basso F., Bellotti A., Faretta S., Ferrara A., Mancino G., Pisante M., Quaranta G., Taberner M., 1999.
Application of the proposed methodology for defining ESAs: The Agri Basin In 'The Medalus project
Mediterranean desertification and land use. Manual on key indicators of desertification and mapping
environmentally sensitive areas to desertification. Edited by: C. Kosmas, M.Kirkby, N.Geeson. European
Union 18882. pp:74-79 ISBN 92-828-6349-2
66
78
•
the system must be adaptable and accommodate the development and
refinement of the existing information content and the addition of new
information.
79