Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN Forum)

Dear,

The concept of resilience is of prime importance when the magnitude of a disturbance implies that a return to the preliminary environmental state will increase the functioning of the system and its environmental functions.

In terrestrial environments, Soil is an interface between the lithosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and atmosphere where the bio-physico-chemical processes occurring will strongly govern the biogeochemical cycles of elements at the global scales. Soil is by its very nature integrated in terms of components and mechanisms. In this regard, sharing knowledge about factors and processes (natural and anthropic) that will influence the evolution of soil properties in the landscape is of utmost importance to get an integrated understanding of the ecosystem functioning of the natural environments.

Soil resilience is defined as the intrinsic ability of a soil to recover from degradation and return to a new equilibrium similar to the antecedent state, to recover its functional and structural integrity (Blanco and Lal, 2010; Principles of Soil Conservation and Management). The environmental factors controlling soil resilience are the factors that control the soil-forming processes: rock, vegetation, climate, topography, time and human influence. We therefore welcome initiative sharing knowledge for an integrated understanding of soil-forming processes that control their properties and, in fine, their functions. In this regard, an initiative such as the Earth’s Critical Zone Observatories (http://criticalzone.org/national/) can augur a promising future in terms of inter-disciplinary research and knowledge sharing about how  bio-physico-chemical processes, and their interactions, affect the evolution of soil systems.

Cheers

Jean-Thomas

Dear all,

Fertilizers are the most important input in crop production

To determine the appropriate dose, type of fertilizer depends on proper ( plant available  nutrient concantration ) soil analysis

unfortunately,  were not developed ( selection) proper soil testing methods to different soil properties .

The method selected for a region are used for all over the different regions ecological use , thus this  fertilizer type  will not be

">economic and ecological

">For this reason,

">as a priority, appropriate soil testing methods for different soil ( and climatic ) conditions should be selected (extaraction method, availability index)

The guidelines set an aspirational target towards which we should all be working. However, we need more than guidelines for SSM, we need action on the ground.  On ground action is occuring in some more developed areas of the world but a range of pressures in less developed areas make SSM a virtual impossibility. Poverty/starvation, drought/flood, conflict/politics, population growth all impose constraints on the ability of governments and people  to implement even the guidelines let alone on ground action. Achieving SSM may be impossible in some areas of the world and, in others, may result in a reduction of the productive capacity of the land thereby leading to other issues of short term food supply.

Need a means for measuring and documenting how implementation of the guidelines results in improved SSM. Need to identify factors that are indicative of improved SSM that can be measured and monitored. Need some case studies that demonstrate how implementing the guidelines can result in real improvement to SSM. Such case studies should not be confined to better developed areas but should include more challenging parts of the globe where conflicting priorities of SSM, drought and the immediate need for short term food production occur.

While the guidelines do outline a way to achieve SSM they are unlikely to achieve SDGs as, for reasons discussed above, they are unlikely to be effectively implemented in large parts of the world. I applaud the foresight and vision of the guideline developers but my cynical hat would suggest that there are far greater world issues to be resolved before SSM is achievable.

Well done for developing a guidelines for SSM promotion in all the countries.

Regarding the current draft, I have some remarks:

1 - I have a concern about that the guideline is voluntary. For me we can not waste time to talk about the responsabilities of the countries. It's time t push all the countries and the development organisation to adopt these guidlines and use it to development national and/or continent policies or strategies to promote SSM. In most of the countries, the development activities present a lot of threats for the soil stability and fertility even if it's to create wealth for the population like for the global environment and climate change we are talking about now. In the same way, it's good you linked the guidelines with the SDGs 1 and 15 but it will be better to show also the link with the environement degradation and climate change and not a separate guidelines. So for me the guidlines should be an obligation for all the countries and development and UN bodies to take account in their actions and strategies.

2 - For me, the guide even if it should focus on objectives could describe some key strategies and/or approches which contribute to SSM. Then the countries and others will decline the actions and activities according to their agroecological realities.

3 - In the point five, I will propose to keep it for Communication and advocacy and add a point six (6) for Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning. Most of the guidelines, policies and strategies failed because lack of a proper monitoting, evaluation and learning process to inform to guide the decision and key actions.

I would like to share with you the summary of the learning event of SHA on SLM in 2014.

· Does the zero draft sufficiently outline a way to achieve sustainable soil management worldwide?

This document is a very good start point for this so important document at global level like this. The idea of gather in a brief way the key factors for a sustainable soil management is necessary.

I would suggest that it could be good to point out what are the ten major threats so soil functioning or enumerate them at least. Also the five Pillars of Action of the Global Soil Partnership should be indicated. It is important to take into account that this document will be read by people that are not familiar with the GSP. One option for not to be very extensive in this document is to put all of this information in annex, appendix or glossary, as decided.

· Have all the key technical elements to achieve sustainable soil management been included in the guidelines?

I think it is necessary to include or to point out a couple of concepts:

a)Soil Quality (It is not mentioned at all).

b) Porosity of the soil related with air flux into the soil. Balanced soil porosity lead to a good structure and an adequate flux of air for permitting a good state for microorganisms life besides the water status on soil.

c) Building up Soil Organic Matter into the soil.  The major reference in the text related with it is focused on organic cover, but less emphasis has been given in the importance for increasing the carbon pool into the soils.

On the other hand, the soil governance concept deserve to be explained more. In this type of document is better to be clear in some key concepts and to avoid the misunderstandings.

Furthermore, the soil conservation structures (engineering point of view) are not mentioned clearly. I think those are still very important soil management practices in areas with high steps and high risk of erosion.

· Do the guidelines take into account the great variety of ecosystem services provided by soils?

In a broad sense it does.  

· Will the results of the guidelines, once implemented be sufficient enough to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?

I think it is necessary to think in other collateral strategies simultaneously beyond its achievement. There is no doubt there are many additional aspects that should be taken into account besides the VSSM. For instance…how the VSSM reach people in general and different social strata?, Who will be in charge of deliver the VSSM? What will be the processes involved in this delivery?....

·Do the guidelines identify activities that should be avoided to achieve multiple benefits through sustainable soil management?

This subject is not clear as others mentioned in the document. Could be good idea to put more emphasis in what are the “bad practices” that should be avoided.

In the attachment you will find my thoughts about the VGSSM.    

attd: Notes III re FAO's VGSSM.docx

I have now been retired for some years, but since soil conservation and land-use planning were the focus of my career (short CV at the head of the doc.) I found the paper resonates with my experiences in the field, and in FAO HQ in Rome on various long/short occasions,and felt bound to respond.

I hope these comments may be helpful, and I would be happy to respond to any queries, confusions etc. that this response may stir-up!

With  best wishes,

Francis Shaxson.

Soil is a living entity harbouring microbes-fungi, bacteria,viruses, algae,micro animals and plants.Obviously the soil plane has water, oxygen, carbon dioxide, nitrogen and above all energy for existance.The single error committed by soil science books was treating soil as a physical entity and soil structure , texture and chemical and physical properties over emphasised.Chemical analysis of soil for micro and macro nutrients and pH alone may not reflect the biological properties of soil.The present soil testing cards are limited in scope and value to that extent.Organic carbon content is very important.The whole issue of soil as a living entity needs to be emphasised.Top soil erosion , mining, urbanization without caring top soil and export of soil are leading to infertility and zero productivity of soils.

Dear Members of the Global Forum and the Intergovernmental Technical Pannel on Soils,

These Guidelines are a good start to promote and support the global adoption of sustainable soil management practices. The input to further complete and develop these guidelines requires multidisciplinary competences which may need an extension of the on-line consultation. Alternatively these guidelines could be considered a lively document to be revised while the various Regions develop the five pillars of action's implementation plans.

For consistency these VG for Sustainable Soil Management need also to address other SDGs (please see a mapping of the SDGs in soil and land in the attached file) for example:

i) SDG Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages, and it corresponding Target 3.9: by 2030 substantially reduce the number of deaths and ilness from hazardous chemicals and air, water and sopil pollution and conatmination,

and

ii) SDG Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns and its corresponding target 12.4: by 202o, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throught their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human heatlh and environment.

These Guidelines focus mainly on the sustainable management of agricultural soils while is neglecting the high impact of the local soil contamination on the human health and the environment. As indicated in the Chapter 6.3 of the "Status of World Soil Resources" both aspects of local and difuse contamination should be covered. 

Specific comments

On page 15 (Zero draft VGSSM) on section 3.8 Guidelines for neutralization of soil contamination last phrase..."This requirement is consistent with principles 2 and 5 of the World Soil Charter". When reading the WOrld Soil Charter Section II. Principles the numbering does not correspond with the reference in page 15 (Zero draft VGSSM). I do not understand the intention of the authors, I propose to quote paragraph 6. "The implementation of soil managementdecisions is typically made locally and occurs within widely differing socio-economic contexts. The development of specific measures appropriate for adoptionby local decision-makers often requires multi-level, interdisciplinary initiatives by many stakeholders. A strong commitment to including local and indigenous knowledge is critical."

Disclaimer "This is my personal opinion and does not represent the opinion of the European Commission".

Dear Colleagues,

Further to my earlier contributions, I attach two more papers which expand on the topics of:

Production systems for sustainable intensification relevant for the first half of section 4,

A. Kassam, T. Friedrich, F. Shaxson, T. Reeves, J. Pretty and J.C.de Moraes Sa. (2011). Production Systems for Sustainable Intensification: Integrating Productivity with Ecosystem Services. Technikfolgenabschatzung – Theorie and Praxis 20. Jg. Heft 2: 38-45. Juli.

and,

Policy and institutional support for adoption and uptake of Conservation Agriculture relevant for section 5.

A. Kassam, T. Friedrich, F. Shaxson, H. Bartz, I. Mello, J. Kienzle and J. Pretty (2014). The Spread of Conservation Agriculture: Policy and institutional support for adoption and uptake. Field Science Research Reports, Vol 7. (http://factsreports.revues.org/3720)

I also include herebelow a link for the FAO publication on soil health.

FAO (2008). Investing in sustainable crop intensification: The case for improving soil health. Integrated Crop Management Vol. 6. FAO, Rome.

(http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/doc/WORKSHOP-LR.pdf)

Sincerely,

Amir Kassam