Presentations at the second meeting of the Group of Experts

1
Presentations at the second meeting of the Group
of Experts

• 1. The Group of Experts (GoE) met in Bonn,
  Germany, from 2 to 7 June 2003, to review in
  depth
• the results of the activities carried
  out by its members during the period from
  November 2002 to
• May 2003.
• 2. The presentations were made by each
  coordinator on the following items
• Assessment of desertification on the global,
  regional and national levels
• To help in providing an updated World Atlas of
  Desertification
• To assist in providing a science plan for land
  degradation research
• Poverty and land degradation an assessment
  methodology
• To help in developing a web-based glossary of
  terms relevant for desertification
• To reinforce a mechanism for an interactive and
  thematic data/metadata network
• To assist in developing a common benchmark and
  indicators system for monitoring and evaluation
  of desertification
• Case study Regional diagnosis for LAC on
  indicators and monitoring systems
• Short-term early warning systems.
• 3. Due to directives concerning the length
  of documents generated in the secretariat,
  presentations by
• the coordinators of the Group of
  Experts are reproduced here in their entirety as
  presented at the
• meeting. The secretariat has reproduced
  these presentations on the website as received
  and without
• formal editing or translation. The
  summaries of these reports are contained in
  document
• ICCD/COP(6)/CST/3.

2
Contents

• Page
•  I. Assessment of desertification on the
  global, regional and national levels (item 1.1)
  3
• II. To help in providing an updated World
  Atlas of Desertification (item 1.2) 25
• III. To assist in providing a science plan
  for land degradation research (item 1.3) 72
• IV. Poverty and land degradation an
  assessment methodology (items 3 and 1.6) 109
• V. To help in developing a Web-based
  glossary of terms relevant for
• desertification (item 1.4) 129
• VI. To re-enforce a mechanism for an
  interactive and thematic data / meta
• data network (item 1.5) 149
• VII. To assist in developing a common
  benchmarks and indicators system
• for monitoring and evaluation of
  desertification (item 1.6) 160
• VIII. Case study Regional diagnosis for LAC on
  indicators and
• monitoring systems (item 1.6) 172
• IX. Short-term early warning systems (item
  1.8) 211
•  

3
Item 1.1 Assessment of Drought and
Desertification on the Global, Regional and
National Levels

Prof. Dr. Kazuhiko Takeuchi Department of
Ecosystem Studies Graduate School of Agricultural
and Life Sciences University of Tokyo Japan
Overview of the Assessment of Drought and
Desertification Several indicators have been
developed for assessing drought and
desertification however, effective benchmarks
are yet to be determined. A drought Early Warning
System (EWS) has already been established and
utilized for the prediction of drought through
modeling approaches. However, this is not
effective when considering countermeasures to
take account of the biophysical and
socio-economic information at the local level.
4

• Concrete methodology for desertification
  assessment, particularly for developing
  benchmarks and indicators of land
  characteristics, has not been established. The
  benchmarks and indicators for drought EWS and
  desertification EWS are closely interrelated.
  However, a standard methodological framework of
  desertification EWS has not been realized due to
  a lack of agreement on benchmarks and indicators.
• The DeMon-I and II projects have developed
  comprehensive modeling in Mediterranean regions
  (Lacaze et al., 1996 Hostert, 2001). However,
  there are no projects for model development in
  other regions, such as Asia and Africa. It can be
  said that there is no operational desertification
  assessment model that can be utilized to assess
  the effectiveness of countermeasures to combat
  desertification.
• Evaluating and Structuring Methodology for
  Assessment of Drought and Desertification
• 1.1. Objective of Drought and Desertification
  Assessment
• The assessment of drought and desertification is
  a methodological framework for developing
  guidelines for countermeasures to be used when
  past and present conditions pass a threshold,
  beyond which environmental fluctuations cause
  serious damage to both the environmental and
  human ecosystems. Each threshold should be
  derived from the monitoring of natural and
  anthropogenic impacts fluctuating from seasonal
  to decadal time scales, and from local to global
  spatial scales.
• First, we consider drought assessment and
  desertification assessment separately. Both have
  some common problems, and common characteristics
  of methodology for assessment. At the same time,
  they have some different characteristics. Since
  the time scale of drought is seasonal,
  methodologies for the prediction of drought
  occurrence and prevention are required, in short,
  an early warning system for drought. On the other
  hand, the time scale of desertification
  assessment is from a few years to decades.
  Long-term countermeasures are required for
  prevention. The long-term prediction and
  evaluation system is desertification EWS.
• Both EWS's include common indicators such as
  Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI),
  rainfall fluctuation, vegetation cover, and
  population pressure. On the other hand, crop and
  livestock, food supply and consumption are more
  important factors for drought prediction. Land
  information and socio-economic issues are more
  important when considering desertification
  assessment (ICCD/COP(5)/CST/4, Table1).

5
Table 1. Characteristics of early
warning/monitoring systems for drought and
desertification (ICCD/COP(5)/CST/4)  
6
1.2. Benchmarks and Indicators for Drought and
Desertification Assessment

• The report on benchmarks and indicators written
  by the CST held by COP2 in 1998
  (ICCD/COP(2)/CST/3/Add. 1) discusses the
  following 5 points
• (1) Establishing a procedure to collect
  information,
• (2) Developing the process of consultation and
  selecting a set of global indicators,
• (3) Promoting a mechanism to evaluate
  applicability of indicators,
• (4) Promoting institutional and technical
  capacities, and
• (5) Maintaining the consultative process.
• However, no indicators were proposed and were
  reflected in the National Action Programmes
  (NAPs). To develop indicators to be used in NAPs,
  a case study has been performed for the southern
  part of Africa Benchmarks and Indicators
  Report of the Permanent Inter-State Committee on
  Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS) and the
  Sahara and Sahel Observatory (OSS) on their
  initiative on the development of benchmarks and
  indicators (ICCD/COP(5)/CST/7).
• That study examined the methodology of the
  evaluation of monitoring to contribute to develop
  impact and implementation indicators to NAPs. It
  also proposed the development of common
  indicators to enable inter-regional comparisons.
  In the report, desertification assessment was
  defined as the determination of the degree of
  desertification and the monitoring of its
  evolution. It should be emphasized that both the
  monitoring of impact and the implementation
  process are very important.
• Moreover, it mentioned the Pressure-State-Response
  (PSR) model, and the Driving forces-Pressure-Stat
  e-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model, which is an
  improved version of the PSR model. However,
  concrete methodology was not clear, and
  benchmarks were hardly discussed. Future
  discussion of these points is needed.

7
1.3. Hierarchy of Drought and Desertification
Assessment

• Various systems of drought assessment have been
  established at an international level. For
  example, the Famine Early Warning System (FEWS)
  developed by the United States (Gonzalez, 2001)
  for peoples vulnerability to food insecurity,
  and the Global Information and Early Warning
  System on Food and Agriculture (GIEWS)
  established by the Food and Agriculture
  Organization of the United Nations (FAO), have
  been made practicable. However, the spatial
  resolution is insufficient for considering
  countermeasures at national and local levels. It
  is important to establish an organization to
  apply such systems on national and regional
  scales.
• It is necessary for food security to evaluate the
  socio-economic status of each region, as well as
  macro indicators such as populations. Macro
  environmental factors such as NDVI and
  precipitation fluctuation have been used for
  assessment on global and regional scales. It is
  now time to develop indicators at national and
  local scales and to monitor and assess them.
• In terms of desertification assessment,
  desertification maps and degradation maps on an
  international scale have been published such as
  Global Assessment of the Status of Human-Induced
  Soil Degradation (GLASOD), but there is room for
  argument about whether the methodology used was
  objective or not. Therefore, more accurate
  evaluation of desertification is required based
  on scientifically credible procedures. Oldeman
  and van Lynden (1998) explained that the concept
  used in Soil Degradation Assessment for South and
  Southeast Asia (ASSOD) has a more cartographic
  base, and employing the concept of developing a
  GIS-georeferenced soil degradation database.
• The Group of Experts (GoE) will give special
  attention to global desertification mapping. A
  more serious problem is the lack of progress of
  concrete discussions for practical
  desertification assessment. Except for a few
  examples, entire sequences of process,
  information collecting, monitoring, assessment
  and modeling of land information are still
  lacking. The ad hoc panel on EWS proposed to CST
  pilot studies for desertification EWS, on the
  basis of understanding this problem
  (ICCD/COP(5)/CST/4).

8
2. Review Criteria and Basis on Which Drought and
Desertification Assessment is Evaluated

• 2.1. Review of National Action Programs
• On reading the reports written in English and
  open to the public on the UNCCD Web site we found
  that only a few national action programmes
  proposed indicators, benchmarks, assessments and
  modeling. The Gambia, India and Kenya discussed
  benchmarks. India, Kenya, Mongolia and Uzbekistan
  discussed modeling.
• The Gambia national report (1999) discussed the
  benchmarks and indicators for measuring the
  progress of implementation. They not only made
  mention of the necessity of benchmarks and
  indicators, but also defined the indicators,
  baselines, targets and responsible party. The
  indicators were classified into 3 categories
  physical indicators, process indicators, and
  process result indicators. Physical indicators
  included items such as increasing forest cover
  and reduction in bushfires. Process indicators
  consisted of the indicators related to community
  management such as increased community forest
  management (CFM). Process result indicators
  included the benefits that the community received
  from the forest management and the participation
  of the community in the forest management plan.
• In the second national report of the Gambia
  (2002), the benchmarks and indicators for
  measuring progress were discussed again and a
  matrix of indicators was proposed. The matrix of
  indicators is divided into strategic objectives,
  indicators and tools. The range of the discussion
  of the matrix is (1) livestock and range
  management, (2) agriculture, soil and water
  conservation, (3) forestry, wildlife and
  fisheries, (4) operational social dimensions, and
  (5) institutional framework for NAP
  implementation.

9

• The national report of Kenya (2002), which
  recognized the effectiveness of Environmental
  Information Systems (EIS) for the assessment of
  land degradation, discussed both indicators and
  benchmarks. A conceptual model of the
  desertification process was proposed, in which
  natural factors and human induced factors were
  the major causes of desertification. In the
  report, EWSs were also described concretely as
  follows An EWS for drought and desertification
  should go beyond just assessing and monitoring of
  drought and desertification, to include
  vulnerability and risk assessment and maps (NAP
  Kenya 2002).
• India also discussed benchmarks and indicators,
  after mentioning EWSs, Land Degradation
  Assessment in Drylands (LADA) and Millennium
  Ecosystem Assessment (MA). They noticed that
  Most countries, including India, do not use a
  scientifically based and verifiable set of
  benchmarks and indicators for monitoring and
  assessing desertification. The Indian report
  proposed criteria for selecting indicators taking
  account of the characteristics of the impact and
  implementation indicators. Moreover, the Indian
  report stated that a benchmark should be used in
  assessing trends over time.
• The NAP of India (2001), which has the most
  advanced scientific view, discussed the
  methodology of the Assessment of resource
  status through soil-weather modeling approach.
  Based on the long-term experimental data, a
  number of models were developed to predict the
  effect of management/conservation practices on
  crop yield and resource losses.
• In the NAP of Uzbekistan (1999) the processes of
  desertification were discussed in detail. The
  factors of desertification consisted of natural
  factors, anthropogenic factors, and their
  interactions. On the other hand, it insisted that
  the study of drought and desertification in the
  future should consider the following points
  degradation of vegetation cover, wind erosion,
  water erosion, soil salinity, dehumification and
  decrease of fertility, breach of the
  water-physical properties of soil, accumulation
  toxic contaminants in soil, influence of the
  animals on soil degradation, influence of
  anthropogenic factors, prognosis of drought,
  influence of the climatic changes, and using of
  wind and water power. For each of the 12 points
  the Uzbekistan report determined the
  corresponding leading scientific and educational
  standards.
• The Uzbekistan report also discussed the
  possibility of modeling desertification (Figure
  1). The distinctive feature of desertification in
  Uzbekistan is frequent sand-dust storm
  occurrences. Sand-dust storms accompanied by salt
  damage the regions surrounding the Aral Sea. The
  establishment of modeling methodology in these
  regions must provide useful information to
  neighboring regions such as China, Kazakhstan and
  Mongolia, where sand and dust storms have
  increasingly became a serious problem in recent
  years.

10
Figure 1. Desertification processes in Uzbekistan
(NAP of Uzbekistan, 1999)
11
2.2. Thematic Program Networks (TPNs)

• In terms of Thematic Programme Networks (TPNs) in
  Asia, TPN 1 to 6 were planned, TPN 1 to 4 have
  been started, and TPN 5 launch meeting is to be
  held in Mongolia in 2003. TPN 1, which is hosted
  by China, aims at the monitoring and assessment
  of desertification. The inaugural meeting was
  held in Beijing, a related meeting was held at
  the United Nations University in Tokyo, Japan,
  and two more meetings were held in Beijing. In
  the meetings the methodology of monitoring and
  assessment, remote sensing in particular, was
  mainly discussed. However, satisfactory outcomes
  were not achieved.
• Currently, TPN1 is editing manuals of the
  indicators and benchmarks in Asia, as a
  prerequisite of monitoring and assessment. Though
  concrete indicators were proposed in TPN1,
  hierarchical differences among indicators, and
  the determination of benchmarks have not been
  discussed yet.
• On the other hand, TPN5 that will be hosted by
  Mongolia aims at the mitigation of drought. The
  possibility of establishing the first drought
  early warning system in Asia will be discussed.
  It is worth discussing the possibility of
  desertification monitoring that includes land
  conditions. It is also worthy combining the pilot
  study proposed by the EWS ad hoc Panel on EWS
  with the discussions included in TPN5.

12
2.3. Operational Drought and Desertification
Assessment Systems

• Drought Early Warning Systems
• The short-term EWSs for drought include drought
  assessment at a basic level. For example, they
  utilize indicators such as the following crop
  status, food consumption, cultivation area,
  rainfall, population density and NDVI.
• The Famine Early Warning System (FEWS) is an
  information system developed to prevent
  starvation in sub-Saharan regions in Africa. FEWS
  is monitoring the regions with a high risk of
  food shortages that lead to starvation, and
  evaluating the climate and crop data, to find out
  which factors may have an effect on the food
  status of the region. The core structure of FEWS
  consists of monitoring and assessment.
• The FAO Global Information and Early Warning
  System (GIEWS) on Food and Agriculture monitors
  the status of farm crops by utilizing rainfall
  predictions on the basis of Meteosat, and
  evaluates vegetation on the basis of NOAA/AVHRR.
  This system also includes monitoring and
  assessment as its core structure. Moreover, its
  distinctive feature is model development that
  integrates agro-climatic, socio-economic and
  human health data.
• Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping (VAM) operated
  by the World Food Programme (WFP), which was
  established to counteract unstable food supply
  and disasters, outputs digital maps of analyzed
  results. The FEWS and VAM satisfy the important
  condition of assessment, that is, the analysis of
  vulnerability risks.
• Desertification Assessment
• FAO mentioned Overall Assessment of
  Desertification (OAD), evaluated the current
  status and the necessity of desertification
  assessment, and pointed out the two following
  problems. Firstly, existing national and
  international data do not meet the present needs.
  Though global data such as GLASOD and SOTER have
  been utilized, they are not sufficient for
  building policies at a regional or national
  level, because the scale is less than one to ten
  million. Also, socio-economic parameters of
  desertification were not provided. Secondly,
  methodology for assessing and modeling
  desertification has not been completed.

13

• Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands
  (LADA) and Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA)
• Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands(LADA) and
  Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) are leading
  the discussion of desertification assessment.
  LADA is based on the collaboration of UNEP and
  UNCCD. MA is a much broader assembly of
  organizations, in which the UNCCD secretariat
  participates.
• LADA aims at the following objectives (i) to
  provide basic, standardized information,
  including maps, databases, etc. on the state of
  land degradation, its causes, its impacts, to
  combat land degradation, at national, regional,
  and global levels, (ii) to develop methods for
  land degradation assessment and monitoring at all
  levels, including methods for use by national
  organizations at local level, and (iii) to build
  capacities at all levels to enable the design and
  planning of interventions for mitigating land
  degradation and establish sustainable land use
  and management practices (ICCD/COP(5)/INF. 7).
• MA covers existing assessments, and makes
  evaluations by focusing on the multilevel and
  holistic indicators and phenomena. MA focuses on
  the assessment of existing data and literature
  and also gives attention to the development of
  some new indicators addressing the ecosystem
  goods and services and their links to human well
  being (MA methods, p5).
• MA is expected to address the question How well
  can scientists predict when threshold responses
  of ecosystems (that is, sudden and dramatic
  changes) might occur in response to species
  losses, increased nitrogen input, or invasive
  species?
• The direct objectives of MA follow three themes
• (1) Systemization of the existing assessments,
• (2) Evaluation of response options and future
  prediction, and
• (3) Capacity building of human, institution and
  organizational structures.
• MA provides useful information from the viewpoint
  of
• (1) The objective of the increase in the total
  benefit from ecological goods and services, and
• (2) Providing choices useful for decision-makers
  by evaluation of response options and future
  predictions.
• MA intends to discuss the multi-scale assessment
  at global, regional and local levels.

14
2.4. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

• According to the report summarizing the
  biodiversity in arid and sub-humid lands
  (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/7/4), six activities are
  required for the assessment of desertification
• The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is
  referred to for two reasons (1) The assessment
  of desertification is a subject for discussion in
  the Convention, and (2) One of the target
  ecosystems in the Convention is drylands, whose
  definitions are the same as that in the UNCCD.
• (1) Assessment of the status and trends of
  biodiversity in dry and sub-humid lands and the
  effectiveness of conservation measures,
• (2)  Identification of specific areas of value
  and/or under threat,
• (3)  Further development of indicators of the
  biological diversity of dry and sub-humid lands
  and its loss, for use in the assessment of status
  and trends,
• (4)  Building knowledge on ecosystem functioning,
• (5)  Identification of local and global benefits
  of biodiversity and socio-economic impacts of its
  loss, and
• (6)  Identification and dissemination of best
  management practices (UNEP/CBD/ SBSTTA/7/4).
• Moreover, this report mentioned the necessity of
  a closer connection to the UNCCD.
• A global biodiversity outlook is being prepared,
  which to some extent, provides information at a
  global level. However, the land degradation in
  susceptible drylands was assessed utilizing the
  data of GLASOD.

15
Table 2. Identified EO production for
desertification (Anonymous, 2002)
16

• 2.5. Hierarchy and Selection of Indicators
• When the CST reviewed the benchmarks and
  indicators in the reports from the country
  Parties (ICCD/COP(4)/CST/5) the secretariat noted
  that there is an urgent need to develop
  indicators capable of being used at the community
  level and which are economically viable.
• The proposal of the benchmarks and indicators
  system for desertification monitoring and
  assessment on the basis of the activity of TPN1
  in the Asia region, described the benchmarks as
  follows Benchmarks are the baseline that serves
  a starting point for evaluation and monitoring
  and thus provides the point of difference from
  which the land starts to degrade/improve.
  Benchmarks can be determined by identifying
  non-degraded land ecosystems under the same
  agro-climatic zone and natural conditions.
• The report mentioned that the indicator system
  should include the four aspects pressure,
  state, desertification impact and implementation
  to which the DSR and DPSIR frameworks seemed to
  be applied.
• For the selection of indicators at the broader
  scale, we have to depend on satellite imagery and
  statistical data. On the other hand, at a local
  scale, it is important to collect field data from
  field surveys and questionnaires. There exists a
  certain relationship between the hierarchy and
  the derived data. To realize drought and
  desertification assessment it is necessary to
  start with the good use of existing data. At this
  point, the desertification monitoring which will
  be launched by the Treaty Enforcement Services
  using the Earth Observation (TESEO) project is
  notable because of the full use of satellite
  images, which will display data on climate,
  hydrology and bio-physical conditions (Table 2).

17
3. Conclusions Drawn from the Methodology Review
and Review Criteria

• 3.1. Benchmarks and indicators
• The Possible Work Plan for Assessment by the GoE
  states that The group might wish to establish
  specific baselines and benchmarks using an
  appropriate baseline year. It is urgent to
  monitor and evaluate the trend of the indicators
  of pressure, status, impact and implementation in
  connection with those in a particular year. The
  CST should intensively discuss this point in
  relation to COP5. The NAPs reviewed in this
  report obviously lack such a viewpoint.
• To solve this problem, the trend data should be
  collected intensively, and model stations for
  monitoring the trend of indicators should be
  established. Such stations must also contribute
  by examining the methodology of the collection of
  local data.

18
3.2. Possibility of Modeling in Drought and
Desertification Assessment

• Modeling for drought assessment at global and
  regional levels has been established. In the
  future, it is necessary to develop them into
  holistic assessments by incorporating
  socio-economic factors and population conditions
  as well as political and religious conditions.
• In developing countries establishment of drought
  assessment at national and local levels is
  constrained by low economic and technological
  levels. Especially at the local level, getting
  access to information itself is difficult. The
  development of methodology to solve these
  problems is an important task. The more local the
  target scale becomes, the more important it is to
  analyze natural, social and human factors, which
  are distinctly different from those at global
  scale. Therefore, the development of suitable
  indicators for the local level is required.
• Establishment of modeling for assessment at the
  national and local levels depends on solving the
  problems such as difficulty in collecting and
  analyzing data caused by the low economic and
  technological levels in developing countries.
  Financial and technological assistance from
  developed countries to developing country is a
  critical need that must be considered when
  investigating this problem.
• In terms of desertification assessment at a
  global level, improvement of the scientific
  accuracy of GLASOD, and starting revision
  activities on the basis of improved
  methodologies, are particularly important. The
  global evaluation of land and water resources is
  especially necessary to achieve the objective of
  understanding land degradation.
• CILSS in the western part of Africa, OSS and TPN1
  in the Asian region are existing examples of
  desertification assessment at a regional level.
  However, they are limited to the stage of
  proposal of indicators. More effort is needed to
  determine benchmarks, to build models by
  combination of the indicators, and to evaluate
  the effectiveness of the implementations by
  simulations.
• A general model including as much land and human
  information as the case studies of the DeMon-I
  and II projects provide, should be applied to
  Africa and Asia. Each regional group should
  discuss and build specific models at regional
  levels, based on the global model (Figure 2)

19
Figure 2. Flowchart of the SEMMED model (de Jong,
1999)
20
Local Indicators for Drought Assessment

• Many of the experts agree that there are several
  aspects and facts to be taken into consideration
  in any complex evaluation or assessment of
  drought events the most important are as
  follows
• 1) Climatic factors (development and trends)
  expressed by real meteorological data,
• 2) Local hydrological/hydrographical data (mainly
  on precipitation and evapotranspiration, but also
  information on groundwater and surface water flow
  conditions),
• 3) Soils (classification and present state of
  endangerments),
• 4) Vegetation and land use, and
• 5) Economic evaluation of present agricultural
  use and looming trends due to global change.
• Drought threat assessment has to deal with
  natural site-relevant factors and agricultural
  production practices as well as socio-economic
  evaluation of agricultural production and its
  impact on regional development. Certain aspects
  of land use and yield capacity might impose a
  threat of drought to one region but could be a
  favored impact for another region.
• When expressing the result of an evaluation there
  are two main methods that can be followed 1)
  creating an integrating indicator taking into
  account all the above mentioned aspects, or 2)
  finding a method for the combination of different
  factors and data on an areal basis (e.g. using
  maps for the illustration of the spatial
  distribution of the different factors and putting
  these maps together with GIS techniques). In the
  case of development of drought sensitivity maps
  in a country or region we prefer the second way,
  but intensive research work is needed.

21
3.3. P-D-S-I-R Framework and Modeling

• The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment divided their
  assessment into three components
• (1) condition and trend assessment,
• (2) scenario assessment, and
• (3) response assessment.
• Ordinary status indicators and benchmarks as well
  as implementation indicators and benchmarks
  correspond to both the condition and trend
  assessment, and the response assessment. The MAs
  proposal of the necessity of the scenario
  assessment is noteworthy. The scenario
  assessment, which predicts how the possible
  policies affect the current trend, must provide
  useful information for decision making when
  considering various backgrounds. Despite
  evaluation based on the prediction of the
  condition and trend assessment, in which large
  uncertainty may exist, it provides useful
  information for ordinary people to help them
  decide whether a policy should be supported or
  not, by understanding the fluctuation range of
  the prediction and the potential consequences of
  the decision.

22
Figure 3. A framework for EWS on desertification
(Kar and Takeuchi, 2001)
23

• References
• Anonymous (2002) Treaty enforcement services
  using earth observation desertification.
  Obtained from http//styx.esrin.esa.it5000/teseo/
  es_d.pdf
• de Jong, S. M., Paracchini, M. L., Bertolo, F.,
  Folving, S., Megier, J., de Roo, A. P. J. (1999)
  Regional assessment of soil erosion using the
  distributed model SEMMED and remotely sensed
  data. Catena, 37, 291-308.
• Gonzalez, P, (2001) Advances in desertification
  monitoring and drought early warning. In Global
  Environmental Forum, eds. Report of Ad Hoc Panel
  Meeting on Early Warning System, held in
  Yamanashi, Japan, June 4-8. 143-161.
• Hostert, P. (2001) Remote sensing driven early
  warning system for desertification and land
  degradation, results and conclusions from
  DeMon-II an integrated approach to assess and
  monitor desertification processes in the
  Mediterranean basin. In Global Environmental
  Forum, eds. Report of Ad Hoc Panel Meeting on
  Early Warning System, held in Yamanashi, Japan,
  June 4-8. 163-169.
• Kar, A. and Takeuchi, K. (2001) Towards an early
  warning system for desertification. . In Global
  Environmental Forum, eds. Report of Ad Hoc Panel
  Meeting on Early Warning System, held in
  Yamanashi, Japan, June 4-8. 163-169.
• Lacaze, B., Caselles, V., Coll, C., Hill, J.,
  Hoff, C., de Jong, S., Mehl, W., Negendank, J. F.
  W., Riezebos, H., Rubio, E., Sommer, S., Filho,
  J. T. and Valor, E. (1996) DeMon Integrated
  Approaches to Desertification Mapping and
  Monitoring in the Mediterranean Basin. Final
  Report of the Demon-1 Project. ECSC-EC-EAEC,
  Brussels/ Luxembourg, 165pp.
• Oldeman, L. R. and van Lynden, G. W. J. (1998)
  Revisiting the Glasod Methodology. In Lal, R.,
  Blum, W. H., Valentine, C. and Stewart, B. A.
  eds., Methods for Assessment of Soil Degradation.
  CRC Press, Boca Raton/ London/ New York/
  Washington D. C., 432-440.
• Reid, W., Ash, N., Benett, E., Kumar, P., Lee,
  M., Lucas, N., Simons, H., Thompson, V. and Zurek
  M. (2002) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
  Methods. Obtained from http//www.millenniumassess
  ment.org/en/publications/methods.pdf

24
Cited National Action Programmes and National
Reports

• India, 2001, National Action Programme to Combat
  Desertification. Vol.1, Status of
  Desertification. 294pp.
• Kenya, 2002, National Action Programme A
  Framework for Combating Desertification in Kenya.
  55pp.
• The Gambia, 1999, National Report on the
  Implementation of the United Nations Convention
  to Combat Desertification. 45pp.
• The Gambia, 2000, National Action Programme to
  Combat Desertification. 85pp.
• The Gambia, 2001, 2nd National Report on the
  Implementation of the United Nations Convention
  to Combat Desertification. 27pp.
• Uzbekistan, 1999, National Action Programme to
  Combat Desertification in Republic of Uzbekistan.
  125pp.

25
Item 1.2 To Help in Providing an Updated
World Atlas of Desertification(First Progress
Report)

• Prof. Dr. Laszlo Vermes
• Szent Istvan University, Faculty of Horticultural
  Sciences
• Hungary

26
1. Aim of the task

• determined at the Hamburg meeting of GoE as
  follows
• review the current status of mapping and the
  Atlas itself
• determine the criteria on what basis the new
  Atlas can be accomplished
• prepare recommendations for the terms of
  reference and development of mapping the
  vulnerability/sensitivity of areas by drought and
  desertification

27
2. Short overview on the World Atlas of
Desertification

• 2.1 Background
• First World Map of Desertification 1977, by
  FAO/UNESCO/WMO, UN Conference on Desertification,
  Nairobi, Kenya
• 1987 FAO/UNEP/UNESCO provisional methodology
  for the assessment and mapping of desertification
• 1987-1990 first global assessment of
  human-induced soil degradation GLASOD

28
2.1 Background (cont.)

• 1992 First edition of the World Atlas of
  Desertification UNCED, Rio de J., Brazil
• 1995 UNCCD signed in Paris, France
• 1997 Second and present edition of the World
  Atlas of Desertification UNEP, compiled by Nick
  Middleton and David Thomas Preface was written
  by Elizabeth Dowdeswell, Executive Director of
  UNEP

29
2.2 Objectives

• The objective or aim of the Atlas was not defined
  clearly in the publication
• In the Preface designed for those working on
  desertification at the global, regional and
  national levels
• and it is intended to facilitate the work of
  governments at the Conference of the Parties of
  UNCCD, and it is aimed to a wider audience
• the global problem of desertification maybe
  this is the key to understand the objective

30
2.3 Content

• Introduction provides the background and
  information needed to explain the technical basis
  of the Atlas
• Section 1 presents the best available global
  assessment of desertification and related issues.
  It is devoted to the relationships between
  climatic factors and desertification

31
2.3 Content (cont.)

• Section 2 presents the higher resolution GLASOD
  survey of human-induced soil degradation in
  Africa provides examples on the complexities of
  the interrelationship between degradation causes
  and effects
• Section 3 (totally new) incorporates a number of
  methodological developments, mainly deals with
  ASSOD assessment of Asia, where greater emphasis
  is given to generating assessment in country
  level rather than at regional

32
2.3 Content (cont.)

• Section 4 (also new) highlights the
  interlinkages between desertification and other
  global environmental issues (soil salinization,
  climate change, carbon sequestration, biological
  diversity) and social dimensions (human
  population and migration, socio-economics) it
  contains also success stories in combating
  desertification (China, Australia, Sahel). A
  World Overview of Conservation Approaches and
  Technologies (WOCAT) is given in form of case
  studies.

33
2.4 Boundaries, difficulties, critical
remarks

• Database accurate and reliable data on the
  extent and severity of desertification and the
  rate of its progress, based on actual ground
  survey, are very scarce. The existing data are
  often controversial and open to doubts and
  criticism. Available data are uneven in scale
  and accuracy, therefore it is difficult to create
  an accurate map as well.

34
2.4 Boundaries (cont.)

• Inconsistencies in the concept and the
  definitions used Basic definition is complex
  and simplifying at the same time, making
  practically an equal sign between desertification
  and human-induced land degradation in drylands
  investigations are narrowing down to the arid,
  semi-arid and dry sub-humid climatic zones.

35
2.4 Boundaries (cont.)

• Global approach to the problem adequate
  assessment and consequent plans to counteract the
  problem can only be usefully carried out at the
  local scaleAdvantage is that it allows
  desertification to be evaluated relative to other
  global environmental issues, like global warming,
  climatic change, biological diversity, etc.

36
2.4 Boundaries (cont.)

• It was useful to develop a world-wide picture to
  identify hotspots at the continental, national
  and local scales for this reason the Atlas was
  organized to start from a global perspective
  (Sections 2 and 3), and tried to give some
  examples in greater detail and in smaller
  scales specific issues of particular importance
  (Section 4).

37
2.4 Boundaries (cont.)

• The scale itself can be a source of mistake by
  the very high scale of a global map a map-unit
  with an overall high degradation/desertification
  severity may be characterized as such because
  moderate degradation/desertification process
  occur in a relatively large part of the unit, and
  vice versa that means an entire polygon is
  coloured on the map according to a particular
  characteristic does not necessarily show that all
  the land within this unit possesses that
  characteristic.

38
2.4 Boundaries (cont.)

• The Atlas does not deal with drought problems,
  however this phenomenon affects great areas all
  over the world, and can be a preceding factor to
  desertification not only in the so-called
  susceptible drylands.Assessment and mapping of
  drought events and sensitivity can be made
  effectively only in local or regional scale.

39
3. Needs for mapping

• 3.1 Needs for mapping the spatial distribution of
  desertificationa) providing general information
  to the public
• b) general information for research
  activities
• c) general information for education purposes
• d) some basic (general) information for
  decision
• makers and organizers interested in
• preparedness and mitigation actions

40
3. Needs for mapping (cont.)

• Mapping should be made in different scales,
  according to real objective of the evaluation
  possibilities, the available databases and the
  concrete aims of the use of the map.
• The maps and evaluations drawn on global data and
  assessment should be broken down to regional
  and/or local scales showing a more accurate
  distribution of the characteristics.

41
3. Needs for mapping (cont.)

• 3.2 Needs for mapping the spatial distribution
  of drought sensitive areasa) detailed and site
  specific information for decision makers and
  organizers
• b) detailed information to local people
  effected by drought impacts
• c) specified information for research
  activities on drought mitigation
• d) specified information for education
  purposes

42
3. Needs for mapping (cont.)

• Analyses and mapping have to be made first in
  smaller (local or national) scale, taking into
  consideration the concrete aim of the mapping,
  the available databases, and using local, but
  generalized and internationally comparable
  indicators, and on the basis of these local maps
  should be the regional or global map compiled as
  a second step.

43
4. Main aspects of a more detailed and complex
mapping methodology

• The following aspects should be combineda)
  climatic (hydro-meteorological) data and indexes
  are of basic importance, but not enough for the
  expression and characterization of the processes
  of a certain area

44
4. Main aspects (cont.)

• b) other ecological aspects should be taken
• into consideration, like- hydrological
  (groundwater and surface
• water flow) conditions
• - soil and topography of the area
• - crop cover (vegetation) conditions
• - relating trends of global changes

45
4. Main aspects (cont.)

• c) other human/social facts should be taken into
  account, like - land use
• - population density
• - economical evaluations
• Therefore a new approach, new methodology and new
  databases are necessary for a better mapping
  process

46
5. Project proposal for the implementation of
the new mapping concept

• January 2003 a group of European (mainly CEE)
  countries decided to create a consortium and to
  make a project proposal to EU FP6 on the
  Development of the European Drought Sensitivity
  Map as a first step and a pilot study for the
  implementation of the new mapping concept. (19
  participants including FAO and WMO)

47
5. Project proposal (cont.)

• Main aim of the proposed research work is to
  elaborate the common methodology and with the
  help of that construct and draw the drought
  sensitivity map in those countries who are ready
  to work together in the frame of a specially
  targeted research project.
• The aim of the consortium is to solve the
  expression of the drought sensitivity of an area
  as complex as possible and to find out the method
  of its illustration on a map.

48
5. Project proposal (cont.)

• Drought severity shows the strength or intensity
  of a special drought event through the deviation
  of the moisture condition (supply) from the mean
  value at a specific location, using some of the
  meteorological or hydro-meteorological indexes
  for numerical expression of water scarcity.

49
5. Project proposal (cont.)

• Drought sensitivity means the distribution of
  the spatial occurrence/appearance of differently
  severe droughts in an area or region, based not
  only on the long-term data of relevant
  hydro-meteorological indexes, but including
  among others also information of soil
  characteristics and plant tolerance. The areal
  distribution of drought severity is changing year
  by year, but drought sensitivity remaining more
  constant.

50
5. Project proposal (cont.)

• Drought vulnerability is expressing
  characteristics of population, activities, or the
  environment being susceptible to the effects of
  drought its degree depends on the environmental
  and social characteristics of the region and is
  measured by the ability to anticipate, cope with,
  resist and recover from drought.

51
5. Project proposal (cont.)

• In the first phase of the research work a
  scientifically based, clear and practically used
  mapping methodology will be developed. In the
  second phase each participating country has to
  start with the construction and drawing their own
  drought sensitivity maps, and these will be put
  together creating the European one.

52
5. Project proposal (cont.)

• First benefit the maps are important tools in
  the hand of everybody who has some role in the
  drought mitigation processes
• Second advantage is the resulted country maps
  can be combined, easily creating this way the
  drought sensitivity maps for the whole continent,
  and the methodology is ready for use in all
  interested countries

53
6. Summary and recommendations

• The World Atlas of Desertification edited by
  UNEP, 1997, is an important and considerable
  trial to summarize global information on the
  process of desertification and land degradation
  in the drylands, to present an overview on these
  lands, and to draw attention of all people and
  governments in the world to the problems
  accompanying desertification.

54
6. Summary (cont.)

• Because of the lack of accurate and reliable
  data, the lack of clear determination of aims and
  objectives, and because of the originally
  selected global approach, there are some
  limitations in the use of this Atlas, and there
  is a definite need for revising and further
  development of it. Taking into account the
  overall criticism of the existing Atlas, and also
  the suggestions of experts in the field of
  assessment and mapping of drought and
  desertification, the followings should be
  discussed and recognized.

55
6. Summary (cont.)

• a) As a first step it is recommended to identify
  the target audience for the Atlas and to
  elaborate the mechanism of dissemination.
  Accessibility is an important consideration.

56
6. Summary (cont.)

• b) The objectives of compilation and constructing
  a new edition of the World Atlas have to be
  determined clearly before the revision work will
  start. The well settled aim of the Atlas will
  influence or even determine the approach, the
  scale, the method of construction, and result in
  a better defined and more effectively used
  publication.

57
6. Summary (cont.)

• c) A new and separate methodology of assessment
  and illustration of drought and desertification
  should be worked out, based on more accurate
  local databases and national scale of evaluation,
  and using a bottom-up type of construction.
• d) Complexity of the topic and influences of many
  aspects should be taken into consideration,
  therefore it is necessary to find out a method
  for the combination of the different factors and
  data on an areal basis.

58
6. Summary (cont.)

• e) A revision and possibly new determination of
  basic terms and concepts is urgent, especially
  making distinction between drought and
  desertification, and a set of indicators
  (indexes, benchmarks) should be selected in both
  cases with the help of which the evaluation and
  expression of the main processes or results could
  be made.

59
6. Summary (cont.)

• f) One of the main drawback of the existing World
  Atlas is that paper cartography in general is
  quite static and becomes quickly obsolete,
  therefore it is strongly recommended to use a
  more GIS-based approach. According to the opinion
  of different experts the role of GIS should be
  central for mapping from several practical and
  data management points of view.

60
6. Summary (cont.)

• g) For creating a new concept and establishing a
  new methodology of assessment and mapping of
  desertification and drought sensitivity, a
  smaller ad hoc team should be organized in the
  frame of the GoE with the participation of the
  coordinators of the tasks 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5,
  1.6, 1.8 and 1.9. This ad hoc team has to prepare
  a second progress report answering all the
  problems mentioned above, and work out a proposal
  for the further development of the Atlas.

61
6. Summary (cont.)

• Concrete work plan of the ad hoc team could be
  elaborated during the second meeting of GoE in
  Bonn
• h) Altogether 30 expert months are needed as a
  basis for financing the work of the ad-hoc team.

62
6. Summary (cont.)

• i) The Group of Experts supports the efforts of
  the European countries to construct and draw the
  European drought sensitivity map, and promotes
  the acceptance of the project proposal having
  been prepared on this topic and sent to the
  European Union FP6 Research and Development
  Programme.

63
6. Summary (cont.)

• ProposalMain reasons for the establishment of
  the proposed ad hoc team are as follows
• For the assessment and also for mapping of
  desertification and drought we should have
• -- final selected indicators (indexes) and/or
  benchmarks for numerical expression of severity
  or sensitivity ? Task 1.6 ? Ms. Elena Abraham

64
6. Summary (cont.)

• -- clearly determined terms (concepts) related
  to desertification and drought ? Task 1.4 ?
• Dr. Ryszard Debiczki
• -- summarized review criteria, including the
  structure and methodology of assessment ? Task
  1.1 ? Dr. Kazuhiko Takeuchi
• -- to take into account the short- and
  long-term early warning systems used ? Task
  1.8/1.9 ?
• Dr. Victor Castillo Sanchez

65
6. Summary (cont.)

• -- it is also necessary to take into
  consideration the mechanism for an interactive
  and thematic data/metadata network ? Task 1.5 ?
• Dr. Maurizio Sciortino
• Aim (and name) of the ad hoc team will be
  Developing the preparatory suggestions for the
  revision of the World Atlas of Desertification
  and for elaboration of a new one

66
6. Summary (cont.)

• For the assessment and mapping methodology
  important points to be discussed, clarified,
  developed and making decision on them are as
  follows
• (1) objectives
• (2) scales (spatial and temporal)
• (3) basic indexes used (hydrometeorological)

67
6. Summary (cont.)

• (4) other aspects to be involved and form(s) of
• their expression and involvement
• (5) common (unified) methodology for
• evaluation and mapping
• (6) clear determination of terms (definitions),
• at least of basic importance
• (7) making institutional connection to LADA
• and MA projects, and to others

68
Appendix 1 Definitions

• Desertification is land degradation in arid,
  semiarid and dry subhumid areas resulting from
  various factors, including climatic variations
  and human activities (UNCED, Rio, 1992 included
  in UNCCD, 1995)The basic indicator of
  desertification in the Atlas is human-induced
  soil degradation. It is often very difficult to
  separate natural processes of land degradation
  from those resulting from human activities.

69
Appendix 1 Definitions (cont.)

• Land in this context includes soil and local
  water resources, land surface and vegetation,
  including crops.
• Degradation implies reduction of resource
  potential by one or a combination of processes
  acting on the land.
• Arid, semiarid and dry subhumid climatic zones
  are collectively referred as the susceptible
  drylands. Hyperarid zones, the true deserts, are
  not considered as susceptible drylands.

70
Appendix 1 Definitions (cont.)

• Drought is not defined in the Atlas. According to
  other definitions (ICID, 1998) drought is a
  deficiency in precipitation from expected or
  normal that when extended over a season or
  longer period of time is insufficient to meet
  demands. This may result in economic, social, and
  environmental impacts. It should be considered as
  a recurrent feature of climate.

71
Appendix 1 Definitions (cont.)

• Drought is a relative, rather than absolute
  condition that should be defined for each region
  and for each group of living organisms (not only
  plants). Each drought differs in intensity,
  duration, and spatial extent. From agricultural
  points of view drought is the permanent and
  considerably high water shortage of a given plant
  stand on a given agricultural and/or forest area,
  which limits the life-processes of the plants to
  a great extent. Drought can not be interpreted
  without plants, because different plants have
  different answers to the same degree of dryness
  or water scarcity.

72
Item 1.3To assist in providing a science plan
for land degradation research

• Prof. Dr. Olatunji Folorunso
• Department of Soil Science
• Faculty of Agriculture, University of Maiduguri,
  Nigeria

73
MEMBERSHIP
Prof.Dr. Olatunji A. Folorunso Coordinator Prof.D
r. Laszlo Vermes Member Prof.Dr. Lixian Wang
Member
TERMS OF REFERENCE

• Review and prioritize current research
  activities (2003)
• Identify and prioritize new research needs
  (2004)
• Identify sponsor for international and regional
• programmes (2005)
• Draw up comprehensive report (2006)

74
SCIENCE-PLAN FOR LAND DEGRADATION
RESEARCH (A) Review and Prioritization of Current
Land Degradation Research Activities REGION
.. COUNTRY..
75
SCIENCE-PLAN FOR LAND DEGRADATION
RESEARCH (B) Identification and Prioritization of
New Research Needs REGION.. COUN
TRY..
76
AFRICA
77
SCIENCE-PLAN FOR LAND DEGRADATION
RESEARCH (A) Review and Prioritization of Current
Land Degradation Research Activities REGIONAfri
ca.. COUNTRYNigeria..
78
Table (cont.)
79
ASIA
80
SCIENCE-PLAN FOR LAND DEGRADATION
RESEARCH (A) Review and Prioritization of Current
Land Degradation Research Activities REGION
Asia COUNTRY JAPAN
81
(No Transcript)
82
(No Transcript)
83
(No Transcript)
84
(No Transcript)
85
(No Transcript)
86
(No Transcript)
87
(No Transcript)
88
(No Transcript)
89
(No Transcript)
90
(No Transcript)
91
(No Transcript)
92
(No Transcript)
93
(No Transcript)
94
(No Transcript)
95
(No Transcript)
96
(No Transcript)
97
(No Transcript)
98
(No Transcript)
99
(No Transcript)
100
(No Transcript)
101
CEE
102
II. Karcag Research Institute of the Debrecen
University, Hungary II/1. A Elaboration of
complex soil protection system to stop the
accelerated degradation and wind erosion of the
soils of the Great Hungarian Plain B - Karcag
Research Institute of the Debrecen University,
Karcag - Debrecen University, Faculty of
Sciences, Debrecen - Forestry Research
Institute, Puspokladany C see title D 1991 E
1993 F Ministry of Agriculture, Hungary G -
Determination of physical and chemical parameters
of soil s influencing their susceptibility to
wind erosion Determination of susceptibility of
different soil types to wind erosion Elaboration
of soil reclamation method using industrial
by-products to improve soil structure Elaboration
of the afforestation plan of Hajdu-Bihar
County H - II/2. A Determination of the
susceptibility of different soil types to
crusting B Karcag Research Institute of the
Debrecen University, Karcag C see title D
1998 E 1998 F Ministry of Agriculture,
Hungary G Elaboration of a process based on
quantified parameters to test different soil
reclamation methods aiming the improvement of the
physical properties of the soil H - II/3. A
Scientific establishment of moderation of drought
damages in the Great Hungarian Plain revealing
water regime features of field ecosystems B
Karcag Research Institute of the Debrecen
University, Karcag C see title D 1997 E
2000 F National Science and Research Fund
(OTKA) G - Quantification of the effects of
different soil cultivation operations on water-
and temperature regime of the soil Elaboration of
the technological elements of moisture preventing
soil cultivation
103
II/4. A Modernization of parametrisation systems
promoting soil utilization and reclamation
decisions for rational use of salt affected
soils B - Karcag Research Institute of the
Debrecen University, Karcag - RISSAC,
Budapest C see title D 1997 E 2000 F Ministry
of Agriculture, Hungary G - Prediction of
dynamics of soil parameters determining soil
fertility of salt affected soils taking the
expectable climatic tendencies into
consideration Verification of a climate-soil-soil
fertility model for salt affected
soils Determination of the necessary reclamation
measures for different utilization alternatives
of salt affected soils H - II/5. A
Examination of less fertile lands loaded with
wastewaters of communal origin B - Karcag
Research Institute of the Debrecen University,
Karcag RISSAC, Budapest C Study the
environmental effects of deep-furrow irrigation
with wastewaters D 1996 E 2001 F Ministry of
Agriculture, Hungary G New data were gained
concerning the loadibility of less fertile
ploughland III. Szent Istvan University,
Godollo, Hungary III/1. A Connections between
irrigation and salt regime of soils in the Great
Hungarian Plain B Department of Soil Science and
Agro-chemistry of the Godollo University C Study
the changes in salt regime of soils due to
irrigation D 1960 E 1969 F Ministry of
Agriculture, Hungary G Determination of salt
accumulation in soils due to intensive irrigation
and by irrigation water with different quality H
-
104
III/2. A Wind erosion and its damages in
Hungary B Department of Water Management and
Land Reclamation of the Godollo University C
Study the effects of wind erosion on different
soils of Hungary D 1981 E 1984 F Ministry of
Agriculture, Hungary G Determination of the wind
erosion sensitive areas in the country H
- III/3. A Research for establishing
protection against erosion B Department of
Landscape Ecology of the Godollo University C
Study the land use type on soil erosion D
1996 E 1997 F Ministry of Agriculture,
Hungary G Determination of harmful effects of
arable land and vineyards on erosion potential of
soils H - III/4. A Examining the K-factor of
the Wischmeier-Smith USLE model with GIS based in
situ research B Department of Landscape Ecology
of the Godollo University C Applicability of
soil erodibility factor D 1998 E 2001 F
Ministry of Agriculture G K-factor must be
examined and determined on the field before using
the model H - III/5. A Examining soils
susceptibility to erosion B Department of
Landscape Ecology of the Godollo University C
Examination of soil e