Tools for better SLM knowledge management and informed decision-making in addressing land degradation at different scales: the WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology

Desertification research conventionally focuses on the problem – that is, degradation – while neglecting the appraisal of successful conservation practices. Based on the premise that Sustainable Land Management (SLM) experiences are not sufficiently or comprehensively documented, evaluated, and shared, the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) initiative (www.wocat.net), in collaboration with FAO’s Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA) project (www.fao.org/nr/lada/) and the EU’s DESIRE project (http://www.desire-project.eu/), has developed standardised tools and methods for compiling and evaluating the biophysical and socio-economic knowledge available about SLM. The tools allow SLM specialists to share their knowledge and assess the impact of SLM at the local, national, and global levels. As a whole, the WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology comprises tools for documenting, self-evaluating, and assessing the impact of SLM practices, as well as for knowledge sharing and decision support in the field, at the planning level, and in scaling up identified good practices. SLM depends on flexibility and responsiveness to changing complex ecological and socioeconomic causes of land degradation. The WOCAT tools are designed to reflect and capture this capacity of SLM. In order to take account of new challenges and meet emerging needs of WOCAT users, the tools are constantly further developed and adapted. Recent enhancements include tools for improved data analysis (impact and cost/benefit), cross-scale mapping, climate change adaptation and disaster risk management, and easier reporting on SLM best practices to UNCCD and other national and international partners. Moreover, WOCAT has begun to give land users a voice by backing conventional documentation with video clips straight from the field. To promote the scaling up of SLM, WOCAT works with key institutions and partners at the local and national level, for example advisory services and implementation projects. Keywords: Sustainable Land Management (SLM), knowledge management, decision-making, WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology.

Adapting to climate change through sustainable land management: experiences of a pilot project in Tajikistan

Tajikistan is particularly exposed to the risks of climate change. Its widely degraded landscapes are badly prepared to cope with changes in precipitation patterns, increased temperatures, droughts, and the spread of pests and disease. Sustainable land management (SLM) provides a “basket of opportunities” to address these challenges, particularly for increasing land productivity, improving livelihoods, and protecting ecosystems. Within the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR) in Tajikistan 70 SLM technologies and approaches on how to implement SLM were documented with the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT ) tools in 2011. For this purpose a climate change adaptation module was developed and tested in order to enhance the understanding about climate change resilience of SLM practices and community workshops conducted to on adaptation mechanisms by rural communities in Tajikistan. The analysis came up with four guiding principles for applying SLM for adapting to climate change: 1. Diversification of land use technologies and farm incomes; 2. Intensification of use of natural resources; 3. Expansion of highly productive land use technologies; 4. Protection of land and livelihoods from extreme weather events. Furthermore, SLM must be up-scaled from isolated plots to entire zones or landscapes and the project developed the concept of three concentric villages zones, the in-, near- and off-village zones. Land users, advisors, and decision- and policy makers face the task of finding management practices that best suit site-specific conditions. This task is most efficiently addressed in collaborative effort, and building up and managing a respective knowledge platform.

Resource allocation with project management software

We present results of a benchmark test evaluating the resource allocation capabilities of the project management software packages Acos Plus.1 8.2, CA SuperProject 5.0a, CS Project Professional 3.0, MS Project 2000, and Scitor Project Scheduler 8.0.1. The tests are based on 1560 instances of precedence– and resource–constrained project scheduling problems. For different complexity scenarios, we analyze the deviation of the makespan obtained by the software packages from the best feasible makespan known. Among the tested software packages, Acos Plus.1 and Project Scheduler show the best resource allocation performance. Moreover, our numerical analysis reveals a considerable performance gap between the implemented methods and state–of–the–art project scheduling algorithms, especially for large–sized problems. Thus, there is still a significant potential for improving solutions to resource allocation problems in practice.

Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling with Project Management Information Systems

Most commercial project management software packages include planning methods to devise schedules for resource-constrained projects. As it is proprietary information of the software vendors which planning methods are implemented, the question arises how the software packages differ in quality with respect to their resource-allocation capabilities. We experimentally evaluate the resource-allocation capabilities of eight recent software packages by using 1,560 instances with 30, 60, and 120 activities of the well-known PSPLIB library. In some of the analyzed packages, the user may influence the resource allocation by means of multi-level priority rules, whereas in other packages, only few options can be chosen. We study the impact of various complexity parameters and priority rules on the project duration obtained by the software packages. The results indicate that the resource-allocation capabilities of these packages differ significantly. In general, the relative gap between the packages gets larger with increasing resource scarcity and with increasing number of activities. Moreover, the selection of the priority rule has a considerable impact on the project duration. Surprisingly, when selecting a priority rule in the packages where it is possible, both the mean and the variance of the project duration are in general worse than for the packages which do not offer the selection of a priority rule.

A note on the selection of priority rules in software packages for project management

Various software packages for project management include a procedure for resource-constrained scheduling. In several packages, the user can influence this procedure by selecting a priority rule. However, the resource-allocation methods that are implemented in the procedures are proprietary information; therefore, the question of how the priority-rule selection impacts the performance of the procedures arises. We experimentally evaluate the resource-allocation methods of eight recent software packages using the 600 instances of the PSPLIB J120 test set. The results of our analysis indicate that applying the default rule tends to outperform a randomly selected rule, whereas applying two randomly selected rules tends to outperform the default rule. Applying a small set of more than two rules further improves the project durations considerably. However, a large number of rules must be applied to obtain the best possible project durations.

The SOLUTIONS project: challenges and responses for present and future emerging pollutants in land and water resources management.

SOLUTIONS (2013 to 2018) is a European Union Seventh Framework Programme Project (EU-FP7). The project aims to deliver a conceptual framework to support the evidence-based development of environmental policies with regard to water quality. SOLUTIONS will develop the tools for the identification, prioritisation and assessment of those water contaminants that may pose a risk to ecosystems and human health. To this end, a new generation of chemical and effect-based monitoring tools is developed and integrated with a full set of exposure, effect and risk assessment models. SOLUTIONS attempts to address legacy, present and future contamination by integrating monitoring and modelling based approaches with scenarios on future developments in society, economy and technology and thus in contamination. The project follows a solutions-oriented approach by addressing major problems of water and chemicals management and by assessing abatement options. SOLUTIONS takes advantage of the access to the infrastructure necessary to investigate the large basins of the Danube and Rhine as well as relevant Mediterranean basins as case studies, and puts major efforts on stakeholder dialogue and support. Particularly, the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) working groups, International River Commissions, and water works associations are directly supported with consistent guidance for the early detection, identification, prioritisation, and abatement of chemicals in the water cycle. SOLUTIONS will give a specific emphasis on concepts and tools for the impact and risk assessment of complex mixtures of emerging pollutants, their metabolites and transformation products. Analytical and effect-based screening tools will be applied together with ecological assessment tools for the identification of toxicants and their impacts. The SOLUTIONS approach is expected to provide transparent and evidence-based candidates or River Basin Specific Pollutants in the case study basins and to assist future review of priority pollutants under the WFD as well as potential abatement options.