(iv) The SLM technologies must be socially acceptable and ethically grounded. The severe problem of soil degradation can be reversed by creating awareness about the stewardship of land resources. Faith-based and cultural organizations must be involved to teach responsibility, respect, generational/gender/social equity, fairness, and societal values of natural resources through SLM. (v) Political support and acceptibility is extremely important to any SLM technology and strategy. The Green Revolution largely by-passed SSA partly due to lack of political support. It is now taking root in some countries of SSA (e.g., Malawi, Ghana) maily because of political support. Visionary leadership, committed to national progress and economic growth (rather than personal), is essential to relevance and effectiveness of SLM options. (vi) SLM adaptation technologies must be considered as an integral component of the mitigation options. These should be considered neither as policy alternatives, nor as opposite to mitigation. In addition, SLM technologies that have appreciable mitigation benefits should be given the prominence they deserve, relative to other industrial mitigation technologies (e.g., clean coal, CCS). (vii) There must by a minimal of trade-offs in terms of competition for land, water, nutrients, energy, etc. SLM technologies requiring additional inputs, are essential to advancing food security, restoring ecosystesm services, and improving the environment. In comparison, forest plantations would require additional water, nutrients and lands. Increasing food crop productivity through SLM is potentially important to limiting atmospheric CO2 concentrations (Wise et al., 2009). In view of these considerations, SLM technologies for four prominent ecoregions are described in the following sections.
(iv) The SLM technologies must be socially acceptable and ethically grounded. The severe problem of soil degradation can be reversed by creating awareness about the stewardship of land resources. Faith-based and cultural organizations must be involved to teach responsibility, respect, generational/gender/social equity, fairness, and societal values of natural resources through SLM. (v) Political support and acceptibility is extremely important to any SLM technology and strategy. The Green Revolution largely by-passed SSA partly due to lack of political support. It is now taking root in some countries of SSA (e.g., Malawi, Ghana) maily because of political support. Visionary leadership, committed to national progress and economic growth (rather than personal), is essential to relevance and effectiveness of SLM options. (vi) SLM adaptation technologies must be considered as an integral component of the mitigation options. These should be considered neither as policy alternatives, nor as opposite to mitigation. In addition, SLM technologies that have appreciable mitigation benefits should be given the prominence they deserve, relative to other industrial mitigation technologies (e.g., clean coal, CCS). (vii) There must by a minimal of trade-offs in terms of competition for land, water, nutrients, energy, etc. SLM technologies requiring additional inputs, are essential to advancing food security, restoring ecosystesm services, and improving the environment. In comparison, forest plantations would require additional water, nutrients and lands. Increasing food crop productivity through SLM is potentially important to limiting atmospheric CO2 concentrations (Wise et al., 2009). In view of these considerations, SLM technologies for four prominent ecoregions are described in the following sections.
560620WP0Box341on0612911001PUBLIC1.docx