3 WP1 - Stock-taking, the assessment of the current situation Task1.1 Assessment of the extent of the agricultural soil degradation problems and the corresponding soil conservation practices Task1.1 a) Assessment of the nature and amplitude of the soil protection problem, a classification (typology)
4 WP1, Task 1.1. a) WP2007 Action 22004 Wind and water soil erosion risk assessment Objective 03.1: Complete a new soil erosion risk assessment for Europe, also contributing to the further development of relevant IRENA indicatorsEzio Deliverable 03.1.2: Reports and maps derived from the new wind erosion assessment for Europe (30/06/2007) Hannes Soil Organic Matter decline Objective 03.3: Indicators and assessment on the organic matter status in soilsVladimir, Roland Salinisation Objective 03.6: Assessment of salinisation in European soilsGergely Soil compactionObjective 03.4: Assessment of soil physical degradationBeata Soil contamination Objective 03.7: Assessment of heavy metals in European soilsLuis Visibility and dissemination Objective 01.4: soil portalPanos & Marc
5 WP2008 Action 22004 Objective 03.1: To review the nature, localisation and magnitude of the agricultural soil protection problem in Europe (SoCo project) Objective 03.2: To implement a case study covering the Region Marche (Italy) on soil/land management and policy measures for soil conservation (SoCo project) Objective 03.3: To organise a workshop in Italy to present and discuss the main results of the SoCo project with local agricultural and other stakeholders, relevant NGOs, representatives of the authorities and policy-makers. Deliverable 03.1: Reports and maps on the nature, localisation and magnitude of the agricultural soil protection problem in Europe delivered to IPTS (30/03/2008) Deliverable 03.2: Report on a case study covering the Region Marche (Italy) on soil/land management and policy measures for soil conservation, delivered to IPTS (30/09/2008) Deliverable 03.3: Report a workshop in Italy to present and discuss the main results of the SoCo project with local agricultural and other stakeholders, relevant NGOs, representatives of the authorities and policy-makers delivered to IPTS (30/09/2008) ObjectiveDeliverables
7 Link with other Task of WP1 } Task 1.1 a) Assessment of the extent of the agricultural soil degradation problems and the corresponding soil conservation practices Task 1.1 b) Description of the relevant practices/technologies including generally available information on their economics and effectiveness under various (natural, geographical, climatic and agri- environmental) conditions Overlay between soil degradation and agricultural conservation practices
8 Task2.2 Developing a common framework for policy analysis. This framework shall take into account the different types of policies, institutional settings, actors, etc. It shall also specify the policy assessment criteria to be applied in the case studies Task2.3 Case studies Sub-task2.3(b) Case study Marche, Italy
9 Task2.3 Case studies Sub-task2.3(b) Case study Marche, Italy Cross-compliance (CAP) Rural Development Plan Marche Region Soil degradation Processes Policy Analysis, effectiveness of the measures
10 How to manage the Task 2.3? Possible solutions: - Open tender (probably too much long procedure) - Framework Contract ESDAC (Arwyn) - Soil Action together with ASSAM Marche (administrative problems)
11 Human resources for SoCo project 18 months of CA (Mrs. Brechje Marechal starting on 1° of October ). 3 man month AD 11-13 co-ordinator In TAS we will not declare on SoCo project the work that is already foreseen as institutional activity.
12 Strengths There is coincidence between deliverables of SoCo project and WP 2007. These activities are already foreseen in WP2008. Many data on Marche region are already available (soil erosion, OC, meteo, DTM 20 m). Weakness The analysis on soil degradation processes has to be made in comparison with Soil Conservation practices (results from Task1.1.b AGRI- ENV). How they will provide these results? List of practices? Spatial information? Some administrative difficulties to manage the Task 2.3 (case study). Opportunities Visibility of the project both inside the JRC and Commission (DGAgri) outside the Commission (Parliament and stakeholder) Threats DG Agri has a real pragmatic approach and wants clear answers on the effectiveness of CAP and Rural Development Policy. The IPTS is the leader and co- ordinator of the project. The approval on our deliverables will come from IPTS.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.