Dear all,
We are grateful for the comments received to date. Our task as to compile the comments so that they can be fully considered by the Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils (when it meets in mid-March). They will review the comments and will prepare a first draft of the Voluntary Guidelines on Sustainable Soil Management based on these inputs. Therefore, we kindly expect further comments so that all issues are well addressed by the different communities of soil users.
The following section briefly summarizes the comments received until the 19 February 2016. Subsequent contributors may wish to consult previous contributions to the Forum.
Again, our thanks to all of those who have taken the time to respond to the e-consultation.
- The current version is focused on agricultural soils only and if to be useful for achieving SDGs, its scope should be wide to other land uses as well.
- There is need of reduce the introductory part and expand further the guidelines per se.
- Specific ways of achieving SSM and, very importantly, assessing its impact (using verifiable indicators) must be included.
- In the VGSSM emphasis should be placed on designing and developing fertilizers with well–balanced amounts of all plant nutrients, including micronutrients, adjusted to the location specific soil conditions in order to meet the needs of the plants and improve food quality.
- As mentioned in the introductory paragraphs, the voluntary guidelines should apply globally so why then try to push CA to all farmers? Fortunately in Sub-Saharan Africa, most policy-makers recognize the need for fertilizer (used efficiently) and varieties, in combination with good agricultural practices, including recycling or crop residues as is or via farmyard manure, and even tillage.
- The need to include land use planning and the need to adapt land use to land agroecological capacity. Restoration of degraded lands.
- The need to eliminate or drastically reducing burning of stubble and plant residues.
- The document is weak in urban and periurban soil aspects (urban orchards, urban soils, sealing,..) which are important and emerging subject.
- First, I suggest that there’s no section named 1.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0. Just name them 1., 4., 5., 6. Second, I think it’s important to present the causes of bad soil management observed through the world. For, the guidelines should indicate how to face the obstacles to sustainable soil management worldwide.
- More emphasis on the mitigation capacity of soil in relation to climate change should be more highlighted.
- Indicating benefits of no-till: “There are no short-cuts to minimum-disturbance no-tillage”.
- Strongly advocates necessity of no-till adoption:” It is scientifically proven, that any kind of mechanical soil disturbance (tillage) applied in a regular way leads to soil degradation at rates very much higher than the natural soil formation processes. Therefore, only with strict no-till approach a truly sustainable soil management will be possible. This should be clearly stated.”
- Suggests making VGSSM consistent with FAO Policy Support Guidelines for the Promotion of Sustainable Production Intensification and Ecosystem Services.
- Attention to an aspect of soil conservation, which is very important but does not quite fit into the categories of soil guidelines are intended to cover. They represent what we might call 'ruins of soil', i.e., abandoned strip mines (USA and Pacific), large tracts of forest destroyed by uncontrolled logging (Burma and Indonesia), unfilled abandoned mines (Cornwall, Eastern Europe, South Africa, etc), aftermath of forest clearance of thin top-soil to 'create' grazing grounds (Amazon basin) and forest fires (Indonesia), and advancing desert (Sub-Saharan Africa), etc.
- Would guidelines for use of marginal soils, soils on steep slopes, wetlands and the soils capability as related to land use could be of use .
- Extension education on soils is inadequate at present; needs enhancement.
Ronald Vargas and Dan Pennock