jane mills - soil management practices
DESCRIPTION
Details practices to improve crop productivity and soil carbon storage and the associated socio-economic barriers and opportunities. Delivered at the SRUC 2013 Conference #SRUCSustain in Edinburgh which focussed on 'Sustainable Intensification' in farming.TRANSCRIPT
Soil management practices to deliver crop productivity and soil carbon
storage: understanding socio-economic barriers and opportunities
Jane Mills, Julie Ingram, Ana Frelih-Larsen, McKenna Davis
Edinburgh 25-27th September 2013
Management Carbon flows Carbon stocks
Carbon storage
Soil functionsFarming systems resilienceRegulating functionsSupporting functions
Why Soil Carbon?
Soil Carbon Management Practices
• Catch crops
• Crop rotations
• Residue management
• Reduced tillage operations
• Fertiliser and manure management
Two overall aims:
• To identify farming systems and agronomic practices that result in an optimized balance between crop productivity and soil carbon sequestration.
• To develop and deliver a decision support tool (DST) and guidelines to support novel approaches to different European soils and categories of beneficiaries (farmers, farm advisory and extension services, and policy makers).
Scotland, Denmark, Poland, Hungary, Italy, Spain
Case study regions
WP1Linking soil carbon &
crop productivity
WP2Soil management
systems in Europe
WP4 DST &
Guidelines
WP3Economic appraisal of soil management
options
Improving knowledge
LTEs & new experiments
WP5Stakeholder
involvement & dissemination
Applying knowledge
Case studies
7
WP1Linking soil carbon &
crop productivity
WP2Soil management
systems in Europe
WP4 DST &
Guidelines
WP3Economic appraisal of soil management
options
Improving knowledge
LTEs & new experiments
WP5Stakeholder
involvement & dissemination
Applying knowledge
Case studies
Consultation with the farming community
Aims: To consult experts both nationally and in the case study regions about two main issues:
1. the current promotion, implementation and barriers to uptake of soil management practices with particular emphasis on soil carbon management, and
2. their experience and requirements of DSTs, with particular emphasis on those supporting soil carbon management.
Method: interviews
• First stakeholder consultation
• 60 advisers, policy makers (decision makers) & research practitioners interviewed across study regions
• Respondents selected based on expertise and experience in relation to the soil and crop management.
• Interview schedules developed using expert knowledge, a literature review and partner consultation
Findings: Promotion and awareness of soil carbon management practices
• Little evidence of specific government policies
• Usually advice integrated as part of other programmes, e.g cross-compliance
• Soil carbon management relatively new issue so awareness generally limited - growing in Denmark and Scotland but remains low in Poland
• Variation in the extent of awareness within countries - reflects farmer age and farming and educational background
Findings: Barriers to promotion and uptake of soil carbon management practices
• Perceived scientific uncertainty about soil carbon management.
• Difficulty demonstrating soil carbon management practices, effects and economic benefits over a long time.
• Farmers’ perceptions, priorities, knowledge and lack of familiarity of soil carbon management practices.
• Perceived requirement to invest in new technology
Findings: Incentives for soil carbon management practices
• Financial incentives
• Evidence of benefits – impact on productivity and profitability
• Real life case study examples
• Messages - use simple language and quantify impact
• Integrating advice into existing advice programmes, policies and regulations
ConclusionsPerspectives from the farming community helping to develop practices that can optimise productivity and soil carbon storage - further consultation activities planned
Also helping to shape the decision support tool, guidelines and policy recommendations being developed in the project
Credibility - scientific plausibility of the technical evidence and arguments Salience - relevant to needs of decision makersLegitimacy - respectful of stakeholders’ divergent values and beliefs and unbiased
www.smartsoil.eu www.catch-c.eu
Thank you!