91850 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Preliminary assessment of the potential benefits of conservation agriculture FAO INVESTMENT CENTRE DIRECTIONS IN INVESTMENT FAO INVESTMENT CENTRE Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Preliminary assessment of the potential benefits of conservation agriculture Turi Fileccia Senior Agronomist, Investment Centre Division, FAO Maurizio Guadagni Senior Rural Development Specialist, World Bank Vasyl Hovhera Economist, Investment Centre Division, FAO with contributions from: Martial Bernoux Soil Scientist, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD) DIRECTIONS IN INVESTMENT prepared under the FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome, 2014 © 2014 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a co-publication of The World Bank and Food and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of FAO, The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank and FAO encourage dissemination of their knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword v Acknowledgements vi Acronyms and abbreviations viii Executive summary ix 1 The resource base 1 Soils 1 2 Crop production 3 3 Soil erosion in Ukraine 5 4 Climate change uncertainties over Ukraine’s breadbasket role 7 5 Soil fertility and climate change resistance 10 6 Approaches to address soil erosion 12 7 CA feasibility in Ukraine 14 CA experiments in Ukraine 14 8 CA adoption in Ukraine 16 9 Potential benefits from CA adoption 18 Specific advantages for Ukraine 18 10 Soil carbon sequestration 21 Phasing CA adoption 22 11 Benefits and economics of CA 23 Farm/enterprise level 23 National level 24 Global level 25 12 Next steps 27 Verification of preliminary estimates 27 Land markets 27 Agricultural technology/advisory services 27 Financial services 27 Risk management 27 Food security 27 Annex 1 Ukrainian soils 29 Annex 2 Erosion of Ukrainian soils 36 Annex 3 Land, cropping structure, and yields 40 Annex 4 Climate change in Ukraine 47 Annex 5 Resource-saving technologies in Ukraine 59 Annex 6 Carbon sequestration and climate change mitigation 64 Annex 7 Financial and economic analysis 71 Annex 8 Institutional settings 77 iii Foreword The findings of this preliminary assessment are the result of field visits to Ukraine in March to June 2013 and interaction with relevant institutional interlocutors, national and international scientists (see Acknowledgments and Annex 8), the donor community, farm managers and owners, agriculture machinery suppliers, technicians and practitioners. A wealth of up-to-date information and data, including important unpublished works, has been collected and analyzed. This preliminary assessment provides an order of magnitude of the impacts and potential benefits of soil fertility and requires more specific analyses and validations. This report was prepared prior to the referendum held in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol on 16 March 2014, and covers the entire territory of Ukraine; in preparing this report the World Bank and FAO do not intend to make any judgment as to the legal or other status of any disputed territories or prejudice the final determination of the parties’ claims. v Acknowledgements This report was prepared by a team of specialists of the World Bank and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The team was coordinated by Maurizio Guadagni, World Bank Senior Rural Development Specialist (ECSAR), and was led by Turi Fileccia, Senior Agronomist, Investment Centre Division, FAO. The team included Vasyl Hovhera, Economist, Investment Centre Division, FAO; Martial Bernoux, Soil Scientist, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD); Dmitry Prikhodko, Economist, Investment Centre Division, FAO; Stefania Manzo, Agriculturalist, Investment Centre Division, FAO; Rostyslav Lytvyn, PhD candidate in Economics; Rodion Rybchynski, Statistics Analyst; Ana Elisa Bucher, World Bank Climate Change Specialist; and Sandra Corsi, Soil Scientist. The report was reviewed in FAO by Claudio Gregorio, Service Chief, Europe, Central Asia, Near East, North Africa, Latin America and Caribbean Service; Roble Sabrie, Economist; Bjorn Conrad, Climate Change Officer; and Benjamin O’Brien, Agricultural Officer, all in the Investment Centre Division, FAO. It also benefited from the comments of Amir Kassam, AGPC; Theo Friedrich, FAO Representative in Cuba; and Louis Bockel, ESAS. In the World Bank, the report was reviewed by Erika Jorgensen, Economic Adviser, PREM, ECA; Ademola Braimoh, Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist, AES; and Erick Fernandez, Adviser, Agriculture and Rural Development, LAC. The team would like to thank the following people for their contribution. Officials: Oleksandr Sen, Deputy Minister Chief of Staff, Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine (MAPFU); Oleksandr Gordienko, Director, Department of Engineering and Technical Support and Agricultural Engineering, MAPFU: Valery Adamchuk, Director, Institute of Mechanization and Electrification, National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine (NAASU); Tetyana Adamenko, Head, Agrometeorology Department, Ukrainian Hydrometerological Centre; Anatolii Balaiev, Chief of Department of Soil Sciences and Soil Conservation, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine; Sviatoslav Baluk, Director, Institute for Soil Science and Agro- chemistry Research, NAASU; Oleksandr Dotsenko, PhD, Institute for Soil Science and Agro-chemistry Research; Nikolai Kosolap, Agronomist, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine; Volodymyr Kravchuk, Director, Ukrainian Research Institute of Forecasting and Testing of Equipment and Technologies for Agricultural Production; Oleksy Krotinov, Agronomist, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine; Oleksandr Kruglov, PhD, Institute for Soil Science and Agro-chemistry Research; Arkadiy Levin, Expert, Institute for Soil Science and Agro-chemistry Research; Anatoly Malienko, Head of Department of Tillage and Weed Control, NSC “Institute of Agriculture of NAASU”; Denys Nizalov, PhD, Economist, Kyiv School of Economics; Nikolai Pavlyshyn, Kyiv Polytechnic Institute; Dmytro Timchenko, PhD, Institute for Soil Science and Agro-chemistry Research; Oksana Tonkha, Soil Expert, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine; Roman Truskavetsky, Professor, Institute for Soil Science and Agro-chemistry Research; Victor Zuza, Head of Research Station, Institute for vi Soil Science and Agro-chemistry Research. From the private sector: Arnaud de La Salle, agricultural enterprise “AGRO KMR Ltd”; Olha Dudkina, Senior Agronomist, Agro-Soyuz Holding Company; Volodymyr Khorishko, Co-Owner and Co-Director, Agro-Soyuz Holding Company; Alex Lissitsa, President, Ukrainian Agribusiness Club; Volodymyr Lubomskyj, Director, agricultural enterprise “Agrarne”; Neonila Martyniuk, Responsible for International Development, Agro-Soyuz Holding Company; Sergey Prokayev, Co-Owner, Chief Executive Director, Agro-Soyuz Holding Company; Alan Renard, agricultural enterprise “AGRO KMR Ltd”; Edward Romankov, Executive Director, Agro-Soyuz Holding Company; Ihor Shabliko, Director, agricultural enterprises “Wind” and “Zoria”; Ihor Snehur, Development Officer, Agro-Soyuz Holding Company; and Andriy Vorobyov, Director, Great Plains Ukraine. vii Acronyms and abbreviations AEZ agro-ecologic zones ABP agribusiness partnership CA conservation agriculture CEC cation exchange capacity CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center EEA European Environment Agency EXW ex-works (the seller’s premises) FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FSRP Food Systems Restructuring Program FSU Former Soviet Union GCM General Circulation Models GDP gross domestic product GEF Global Environmental Facility GFDL Geophysics Fluid Dynamics Laboratory GHG greenhouse gases GISS Goddard Institute for Space Studies IPPC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IRR internal rate of return MAPFU Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine NAAS National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine NPV net present value NULES National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine RHH rural households SAT single agricultural tax SCLR State Committee of Land Resources SOM soil organic matter SSAI Soil Sciences and Agro-chemistry (research) Institute UHMC Ukrainian Hydrometeorological Centre UNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change USDA United States Department of Agriculture WRB World Reference Base viii Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Executive summary Highly favourable agro-ecological conditions and an advantageous geographical location give Ukrainian agriculture its competitive edge Ukraine is renowned as the breadbasket of Europe thanks to its black soils (“Chernozem” black because of the high organic matter content) which offer exceptional agronomic conditions. One-third of the worldwide stock of the fertile black soils, which cover more than half of Ukraine’s arable land, a large variety of climatic zones, and favourable temperature and moisture regimes, offers attractive conditions for the production of a large range of crops including cereals and oilseeds. Ukraine’s proximity to large and growing neighbouring markets – the Russian Federation and the European Union – and access to deep sea ports at the Black Sea, provide direct access to world markets, especially large grain importers in the Middle East and North Africa. Erosion triggered by land tillage is threatening both comparative advantages and competitiveness of Ukrainian crop production systems Over the years, the Chernozem soils have been widely degraded by poor land management and the resulting soil erosion. It is estimated that more than 500 million tonnes of soil are eroded annually from arable land in Ukraine1 resulting in loss of soil fertility across 32.5 million hectares and equivalent to around USD 5 billion in nutrient equivalent. This represents a significant loss of the country’s main agricultural productive asset: its soils. The value of eroded soil each year is around one-third of the agricultural gross domestic product (GDP). This means that for each dollar of added agricultural value generated, one-third is lost through erosion; or ten tonnes of soil are eroded for each tonne of grain produced2. Soil erosion is the major challenge that threatens the comparative advantage of crop production systems of Ukraine. Other major natural damage caused by soil erosion is likely to include siltation of rivers, harbours, and dam reservoirs (feeding hydroelectric power stations).While the above estimates are national averages, the problem is much more acute in specific areas, particularly in the south-east of the country where soil has been eroded to a desertification extent. There is evidence to suggest that the intensity of erosion and resulting loss of soil fertility is accelerating. Loss in soil fertility inevitably increases production costs of field corps by requiring additional resources to maintain the same productivity (for instance, additional fertilizers to keep the same yield). 1 Source: Official statistic of the Ministry of Agriculture. This assessment is based on two field surveys carried out in 1961 and 1985 in state land of Ukraine (at that time a Soviet Republic). In 2006, Dr. Bulygin made an estimate of 760 million tonnes based on a hydromechanical soil erosion model built on average weighted values for runoff length, slope, soil erodibility, and crop management. The more conservative amount of 500 million has been selected as a cautionary measure. 2 Team estimates based on 500 million tonnes annual erosion versus an average cereals and oilseeds production of 49.8 million tonnes (2006-12 average, source FAOSTAT). ix Soil degradation processes driven by erosion imply a number of interlinked issues. Organic matter works like glue that keeps soil particles together, improving their structure. Thus organic matter increases the resistance of soil to mechanical disturbance, such as those produced by rain falling on the ground or a tractor wheel. That is why fertile soils with higher organic matter content are less prone to erosion or compaction, and have higher infiltration. Organic matter also increases soil capacity to hold water. Loss of organic matter reduces its capacity to retain moisture, which is always essential especially during dry years. During the last 15 years, drought events have increased both in intensity and frequency in Ukraine due to a changing climate. Droughts are now occurring on average once every three years, causing crop productivity decline. It is expected that climate change, and the projected increase of extreme events, will exacerbate these phenomena in the near future. In some major productive areas of the country (the so-called Steppe area, in the southern part of the country) these impacts are more severe than elsewhere. This region produces 50 percent of the grain of Ukraine. Paradoxically, the high agricultural quality of Ukrainian soils and the prevailing perception of their inherent productivity resilience is delaying much needed remedial measures that should be put in place to first stop and then reverse soil degradation. Without action, the cost to reverse soil degradation is increasing rapidly and in some areas soils have become so degraded that it is now extremely expensive to recover them. Excessive land tillage is well known to be the major driver of soil erosion. The Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine (MAPFU) is fully aware of this and is prioritizing erosion prevention and the use of resource-saving technologies. Ukrainian soil scientists and academics - albeit with limited resources and means - are focusing their research on stopping and reversing soil erosion, including the projected negative impacts of climate change. Farmers are under pressure to reduce their production costs to be competitive in the global market and so have begun introducing resource-saving strategies and innovative soil conservation technologies such as minimum tillage. The considerable expansion of the use of minimum tillage during the last decade (see Table 28) is testimony of the effort towards change. This is a move in the right direction that has already provided a number of important benefits. However minimum tillage technology alone provides only a partial remedy to soil erosion and the loss in soil fertility. Conservation agriculture (CA) with no-till is a more sustainable and effective Climate Smart Agriculture practice which reduces soil erosion, maintains soil fertility, and enhances drought resilience3 and significantly reduces production costs by minimizing fuel consumption4. CA has now been successfully implemented in Kazakhstan, where, with support of the World Bank, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT, 1 of 15 international agricultural research centres part of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research [CGIAR] Consortium), the technology has been gradually adopted and reached 1.85 million ha in 2012, contributing to significant productivity and environmental benefits5. . 3 See section “Soil fertility and climate change resilience” 4 See Annex 7 . 5 See http://www.eastagri.org/publications/pub_docs/Info%20note_Print.pdf and http://www.worldbank. org/en/results/2013/08/08/no-till-climate-smart-agriculture-solution-for-kazakhstan. x Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience During the last ten years or so, some progressive farmers of Ukraine -- with international exposure -- have also satisfactorily adopted conservation agriculture on about 2 percent of the arable land of the country, mainly in the Steppe area. Unfortunately, this is still happening too sparsely to stimulate wide emulation. Misconceptions regarding CA technology adaptation, such as the belief that Ukrainian soils are not suitable to the technology, are creating obstacles to widespread adoption. Improved research networking is required to facilitate knowledge sharing on appropriate application and technology effectiveness. However, the wave of change and the genuine professional interest of agriculture enterprises appear to be increasing. This ought to be further encouraged and leveraged. Should dedicated resources and specific development initiatives be made available, it is likely that agricultural enterprises - beginning with the Steppe area where the erosion issues are more pressing - will start championing a virtuous cycle towards large-scale adoption. FAO, with World Bank support, carried out a first analytical attempt to quantify the benefits that large scale CA adoption could generate in Ukraine. The country- specific preliminary assessment provides remarkable estimates on the potential benefits at different levels: farm, national and global. The national annual benefits potentially accruing from CA/no-till adoption on 17 million hectares could reach an impressive USD 4.4 billion, or 34 percent of agricultural GDP, and almost stop the USD 5 billion natural capital depletion caused by soil erosion (without counting global environmental and food security benefits). The potential benefits of three scenarios are summarized in the Table 1. Table 1: Ukraine: Potential impact from the adoption of conservation agriculture Benefits for 3 Benefits for Benefits for Level Type Per 1 ha million ha 9 million ha 17 million ha (short-term) (medium-term) (long-term) Annual farm Incremental net USD 136 USD 0.41 billion USD 1.23 billion USD 2.31 billion benefits income Off-farm additional Annual national output value and USD 123 USD 0.37 billion USD 1.11 billion USD 2.10 billion benefits additional soil fertility value Total national benefits USD 259 USD 0.8 billion USD 2.3 billion USD 4.4 billion % share of agricultural GDP 6 18 34 Improved food security (additional 16.1 million 30.4 million people fed during 2.4 people 5.4 million people people people drought years, non- Annual global monetary benefit) benefits 1.5 million 4.4 million 8.3 million 0.5 tonnes CO2 (equivalent to the (equivalent to (equivalent to Reduced emission per year emissions of 0.3 the emissions of the emission of million cars) 0.9 million cars) 1.7 million cars) Investments in Total farm equipment investment and herbicides, USD 200 USD 0.6 billion USD 1.8 billion USD 3.4 billion requirements plus research and extension The above table represents a rough estimate of the benefits which could accrue from large-scale CA adoption in Ukraine. These estimates, which include the benefits of the area already under CA, were based on the following assumptions: xi • The potential areas were estimated on the basis of specific technical and organizational feasibility, soil and crop types. CA would have the maximum potential in the short-term (a few years) to cover an area of about 3 million hectares in the Steppe region (farms of 4 000 hectares and above). The Steppe region has the potential in the medium-term (six to ten years) of reaching 9 million hectares (the entire suitable area in the Steppe region). Ultimately, a gradual move into the Forest Steppe area could be foreseen so that, in the longer term, a total area of 17 million hectares could be converted to CA. The estimates were obtained by multiplying the benefits per hectare for the potential adoption area. • The incremental net income at farm level is a function of reduced costs for fuel and mechanization, increased long-term yields (after decreasing yields during the first years of technology adoption), higher investment costs for new equipment but lower equipment depreciation, increased costs for herbicides and fertilizers over the first years of technology adoption. • The off-farm national benefits are estimated as a function of the additional national benefits derived from the following assumptions: (i) the reduction of crop production variability with the introduction of CA/no-till would benefit traders and intermediaries (additional production for the price difference between export and farm gate prices); and (ii) 75 percent soil erosion reduction6 quantified in terms of the value of NPK nutrients loss avoided. The off-farm benefit from reduced siltation of fluvial infrastructure and reduced import of fuel were not included in these national benefits. • According to World Development Indicators, the 2008-12 average agricultural GDP of Ukraine is 11.8 billion at current prices. • Improved food security was estimated in terms of increased supply of cereals on the basis of an average annual consumption of 130 kg of cereals/per capita/per year. • Carbon sequestration has been estimated on the basis of the global estimates of soil carbon sequestration rates7 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007, see Annex 6. While climatic conditions are generally favourable in Ukraine, climatic variability, which is expected to increase with climate change, is a considerable risk for agriculture The volatility of agricultural production is caused by high dependency on natural precipitation since only 2 percent of cropland is irrigated. Although several climatic models predict that a warmer climate would be beneficial overall for agriculture in Ukraine, geographic distribution of benefits is unlikely to be uniform. Increasing temperatures may have some positive impact in the colder and more humid regions in the north of Ukraine. However, in the south of the country, where most fertile chernozem soils are concentrated and where water availability is a limiting factor, increasing temperatures and increasing variability in rain are expected to increase the frequency of droughts and have a negative impact on agriculture. Soil erosion exacerbates the impact of climatic variability, while simultaneously extreme weather will increase soil erosion. This double link is expected to impose 6 This value was selected on the basis of international experience. 7 Annual mitigation of 0.33 tCO2-eq /ha /yr (this is the average of 0.15 tCO2-eq/ha/yr-1 for the Cool Dry zone and 0.51 tCO2-eq /ha /yr-1 for the Cool Moist zone) for soil sequestration + 0.16 t CO2/ha/year of avoided emission from fuel burning. xii Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience a further threat to Ukraine’s extraordinary soil fertility and its inherent resilience to climate change. Climate change is expected to lead to increasing frequency, intensity, coverage, duration, and timing of extreme weather and climatic events (IPCC 2012). Extreme climatic events, such as alternating droughts and intense rainfalls, are expected to have a negative impact on agriculture, including but not limited to increased soil erosion. Fertile soils, with abundant organic matter, are more resilient to wind and water erosion than unstructured soils, with low organic matter. Intense rainfalls increase water erosion, while dry soils are more susceptible to wind erosion. Agricultural productivity depends on natural precipitation and temperatures which are affected by significant inter-annual and seasonal variability. It is expected that climate change will further exacerbate the already high volatility of agricultural production and negatively affect food security. High production variability in Ukraine may have implications for global trade and world price volatility. The 2009 drought and consequent loss of almost 30 percent of Ukraine’s wheat crop was an important trigger in the global food price rise. Figure 1: The climate of Ukraine is changing, 1961-2012 Average annual air temperature deviation from the norm 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 Source: World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal. Most future climate predictions are based on General Circulation Models (GCM) which predict an overall increase in precipitation in the region. However, there are conflicting estimates on the potential impact of these changes on agriculture. The difference in the estimates highlights the lack of robust climate analysis in terms of seasonal variability, timelines, baselines used, and overall assessment of a range of climate models outputs and associated uncertainties for the interpretation of predicted impacts. It is therefore important to recognize the inherent uncertainties of each model in its ability to predict a changing climate. Additional modelling studies8 indicate that although large portions of Ukraine might increase their agricultural potential under warming scenarios, agriculture in the semi-arid southern zone could suffer a dramatic increase in frequency of droughts. Any projection of agricultural expansion based on climate change scenarios should be viewed with caution, if they do not take into account other regional socio-economic 8 Alcamo et al. (2007) and Dronin and Kirilenko (2008). xiii factors such as land degradation, access to improved seeds, etc.9 Expansion of climatic zones suitable for agriculture does not necessarily imply that the local population currently employed in other sectors would seek out new opportunities in agriculture, or will be prepared to change agriculture practices such as use of market-preferred improved seeds varieties. On the other hand, declining productivity due to increasing aridity in the southern area of Ukraine may result in the loss of human capital as skilled farmers may be forced to switch to other activities. Assessment of human vulnerability and adaptation to climate change needs to become a key component of agricultural policies. Adaptation, such as large-scale implementation of soil-water conservation measures (i.e. no till), introduction of drought resistant crop varieties and development of irrigation are crucial to increase climate resilience and food security. Suggested steps to address these concerns Several of the next steps proposed below require additional financing. With regard to the global benefits that the proposed actions could generate, there are some sources of international financing for which Ukraine could apply. For instance, grant funding from the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and from the Adaptation Fund is available for Ukraine. The GEF will start a new funding period in July 2014 (called GEF-6), where funds are available for Ukraine to address issues related to climate change (USD 17.4 million) and land degradation (USD 2.9 million). The GEF does require co-financing, usually at least four times that of the GEF grant amount. The Adaptation Fund has a grant of up to USD 10 million available for Ukraine. The Adaptation Fund has financed agricultural adaptation investments in many countries, in line with the actions suggested above. The suggested next steps are as follows: (i) Verification of preliminary estimates: This preliminary assessment would benefit from a more detailed follow-up investigation to address areas such as detailed on-farm productivity; economic and environmental analyses for technology comparison; assessment of agricultural machinery capacity and market; evaluation of erosion impact on river systems and siltation. (ii) Land markets: Increase confidence in long-term use of land so as to create incentive for farmers who use arable land to invest in soil fertility. (iii) Agricultural technology/advisory services: Develop a programme of agricultural technology/advisory services to address soil fertility concerns. (iv) Financial services: Consider developing a programme to facilitate access to finance for those farmers who invest in environmentally friendly approaches such as Conservation Agriculture. Work with agricultural insurance so that CA does not pay higher premiums. (v) Risk management: Work with the research and farm community to improve the quality of climate change estimated potential impact on agriculture, differentiating risks and adaptation approaches by agro-ecological region. (vi) Food security: Strengthen incentives for adopting technologies to maintain soil fertility and reduce the volatility of agricultural production, such as CA with no-till. The potential benefits presented in this study (Table 1) and the risks caused by a changing climate should constitute a strong incentive to increase soil fertility efforts and strengthen climate resilience. 9 Lioubimtseva, 2010. xiv Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience 1. The resource base Figure 2: Agro-ecologic zones (AEZ) of Ukraine , Kyiv 2010. Source: MAPFU “On state of soil fertility in Ukraine” Ukraine is the second largest country in Europe Soils10 (603 700 km2) with three large agro-ecological Ukraine has some of the most fertile soils in the zones and two mountain regions: a Forest zone world, including the famous Chernozems, deep (Polissya) in the North (19 percent of total land); black soils rich in humus. Chernozems occupy a Forest-Steppe zone (35 percent) to the South; about half of the country (about 68 percent of a Steppe zone in the South and South-East the arable land), followed by Phaeozems and (40 percent); and the Carpathian and Crimean Albeluvisols. mountains, which occupy respectively the west and the very southern part of the country. Physical, chemical and biological nominal data of Ukrainian soils and their classification were The Steppe zone covers 19 million hectares studied in the late 1950s (completed in 1961). of agricultural lands; the Forest-Steppe zone Since then no countrywide soil data update has 16.9 million hectares, and the Forest zone been done11. 5.6 million hectares. Nominal soil organic matter (SOM) content of chernozems ranges from 5.2 percent in wet 10 For further details see Annex 1. 11 Sviatoslav Baluk, Director, Institute for Soil Science and Agro-chemistry Research during roundtable discussions in Kyiv, 23 May, 2013. See also note n. 11. 1 Figure 3: Soils of Ukraine 2% 2% 4% 9% Chornozems 68% Meadow Chornozems 11% Gray soils Sod-Podzolic, Podzoic and Gley 4% Dark brown and saline soils Brown soils Others Source: team elaboration from Balyuk S.A, 2013. Table 2: Ukraine: agropotential of chernozem soil for winter wheat Percentage of Zone Soil Yield agro potential arable land Natural Optimal % (q/ha) (q/ha) Forest Steppe Chernozem podzolic 30 - 38 40 - 48 8.6 Chernozem Typical 32 - 36 38 - 45 14.5 Typical chernozem and Meadow 30 - 36 54 - 64 1.0 Steppe Chernozem ordinary 23 - 34 31 - 40 26.3 Chernozem Southern 18 - 25 22 - 31 9.1 Source: team elaboration from Balyuk, 2013. Forest-Steppe to 5.7 percent in Forest-Steppe, This behaviour is partly dependent on the and 6.2 percent in Steppe, to 3.4 percent or less Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC)12 of the soils. in South Steppe. Fertility follows a similar pattern, Soil organic materials increase the CEC and so decreasing from Forest Steppe to southern organic matter build-up impacts positively on soil Steppe. fertility and productivity. The physical properties of the Chernozems are also crucial for their agronomic potential. 12 CEC is the maximum quantity of total cations available for exchange with the soil solution that a determined soil is capable of holding. CEC correlates with the soil fertility and is definitely dependent on the mineral matrix but also on the amount and quality of soil organic matter. 2 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience 2. Crop production 13 Figure 4: Destination of Ukraine cereals exports, 2012 20,5% 27,1% Egypt Portugal Spain Libya Total Export Saudi Arabia South Korea 27 3,2% mln MT 15,3% Iran Japan 3,3% Israel Italy 3,5% 3,7% 6,9% 3,9% Others 6,0% 6,5% Source: State Customs Committee of Ukraine, Global Trade Atlas. Table 3: Agricultural lands by ownership in 2012 Operators Total Rural Enterprises Others Households Units 47 652 5 100 000   Agricultural land, million ha 20.7 15.8 5.0 41.5 Arable land, million ha 19.4 11.6 1.5 32.5 Source: MAFP, Panorama of Ukraine Agrarian Sector 2012. During 2008-2012, Ukraine ranked sixth and The total crop area in Ukraine amounts to third largest world wheat and coarse grains14 27.8 million ha; over 55 percent of crop lands are exporter, respectively. The country exported used for cereal production. Crop land use change about 23 million tonnes of cereals. The total value since 2000 has been mainly in favour of industrial of cereals exports reached almost USD 7 billion crops (oilseed); and within the cereal area, in mostly to North Africa, the Middle East and favour of corn. Europe, as shown in Figure 4. Ukraine is characterized by volatile wheat and Sixty-nine percent of Ukrainian territory is coarse grains productivity. On average, every agricultural land, totalling 41.5 million ha of which three years, wheat production changes by 32.5 million ha is arable land. Eighty eight percent 20 percent and corn by 25 percent. This has a (36.5 million ha) of total agricultural land is owned major impact on Ukraine’s trade balance. by agricultural enterprises (about 48 000 units), and by rural households (RHH)15. Lower wheat yields volatility is a feature of provinces in the Forest-Steppe and Forest zones, and in Mykolaiv province. On the contrary, the Steppe zone is usually characterized by high volatility especially Kharkivska province. Corn 13 For further details see Annex 3. yields are also more volatile in the Steppe zone, 14 Coarse grains refer to cereal grains other than wheat and rice. particularly in the Luhanska and Kharkivska 15 Source: Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food (MAPFU), Panorama of Ukraine Agrarian Sector 2012. provinces. 3 Figure 5: Ukraine: evolution of crop areas 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2000 50,2 8,4 15,4 26 2012 55,4 28,4 9 7,2 Cereals, total Industrial crops Fodder crops Potato and veg. 2011/05 18 leguminous and others 16 spring - rice 14 Corn spring - buckwheat + 112% 12 spring - millet million ha 10 Spring barley spring - maize for grain - 36% 8 spring - oats Winter barley + 150% spring - barley 6 spring - wheat 4 Winter wheat + 5% winter - barley 2 winter - rye 0 winter - wheat 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 Sources: MAFPU, Panorama of Ukraine Agrarian Sector 2012 and UkrStat. Figure 6: Production, exports and yield variability, 2000-2012 Wheat Coarse grains 30 40 35 25 30 million tonnes million tonnes 20 25 15 20 15 10 10 5 5 0 0 2000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 20062007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Export Production Domestic consumption Export Production Domestic consumption Source: FAO OECD Agricultural Outlook 2013-22. Wheat yield volatility Corn yield volatility (Standard deviation/average) (Standard deviation/average) United States European Union France France Australia United States Turkey European Union Russian Kazakhstan Federation Former Canada Soviet Union Argentina Canada Former Argentina Soviet Union Ukraine Ukraine Kazakhstan Russian Federation Australia Turkey 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 percent percent Source: Team calculations based on PSD USDA. 4 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience 3. Soil erosion in Ukraine 16 At the time of the Soviet Union, agricultural Republic). In 2006, Dr. Bulygin estimated that intensity and land tillage were very high in 760 million tonnes per year were lost from arable Ukraine, causing significant erosion. According land. This was based on a hydromechanical soil to FAO (Bogovin, 2006), the annual soil losses erosion model using average weighted values in the Soviet times amounted to as much as for runoff length, slope, soil erodibility, and crop 600 million tonnes, including 20-30 million tonnes management. The more conservative amount of of humus. An estimated 40 percent of the 500 million tonnes has been selected as a more country’s territory is now eroded at different cautious measure. levels of severity, and an additional 40 percent is prone to further wind and water erosion. The amount of soil eroded corresponds to 23.9 million tonnes of humus, A 1996 study by the State Committee of Land 964 thousand tonnes of nitrogen, Resources (SCLR) reported that 13.2 million ha 676 thousand tonnes of phosphorus and were exposed to water erosion, and 1.7 million ha 9.7 million tonnes of potassium. At market were exposed to wind erosion17, increasing price20, this amount of NPK nutrients corresponds at a rate of about 60 000-80 000 ha per year. to over USD 5 billion of losses per year (USD 157 Erosion was estimated in 2013 to affect about per hectare).The yearly loss ranges from about 1 414.5 million hectares. This is also confirmed by 3 to 30 tonnes of soil per hectare depending the Soil Sciences and Agro-chemistry (research) on the region. This is estimated to amount to Institute (SSAI O.N. Sokolovsky) . Erosion impact 18 a loss of about USD 5 billion per year (2013). A has been exacerbated in the post-Soviet era by loss of 10 tonnes of soil corresponds to a loss significantly reduced application of mineral and of 0.5 tonnes of Carbon (C) per ha: a significant organic fertilizers, which has caused a sharp amount when compared with the existing decline in soil humus content. potential soil C sequestration levels. There is evidence to suggest that the intensity of erosion MAPFU official statistics estimate that about 19 is accelerating (Bulygin and Nearing, 1999). 500 million tonnes of soil are lost annually from 32.5 million ha arable lands. This means that an Soil erosion represents a significant loss of the average of 15 tonnes per year is eroded from country’s main agricultural productive asset: arable land. This estimate is credible and in line its soils. Such erosion of productive capital is with erosion in similar conditions. It is based on substantial. The value of eroded soil each year two field surveys carried out in 1961 and 1985 is around one-third of the agricultural GDP. This in state land in Ukraine (at that time a Soviet means that for each dollar of agricultural value added generated, one-third is lost through erosion; or ten tonnes of soil are eroded for each 16 See Annex 2 for more detail. 17 World Bank, 2007 .Integrating Environment into Agriculture tonne of grain produced. and Forestry Progress and Prospects in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Volume II. Ukraine, Country Review. 22 pp. www.worldbank.org/eca/environmentintegration. 18 Founded in 1956 and named after academician Oleksiy Nykanorovych Sokolovskyj. The Research Institute is in charge for providing rational exploitation of the land resources, protection and increase of soil fertility. It oversees national and state programmes; analyzing and proposing also normative bases on development of soil science, agro-chemistry and soil protection. The Soil Map of 20 The price estimates used to calculate the market value of Ukraine was developed by this institute (1957-1961). NPK nutrients are the following: 3300 UAH per 1 Tonne of 19 Reported by Bulygin S., 2006. Ukraine. Pages 199-204.Soil N, 5750 UAH per tonne of P and 3570 UAH per tonne of K. Erosion in Europe (Boarman J and Poesen J. Editors), John These are conservative price estimates and do not value Wiley and Sons. the downstream damage. 5 Figure 7: Average annual soil loss during the last 30 years from Ukrainian arable land Source: Bulygin, 2006. 6 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience 4. Climate change uncertainties over Ukraine’s breadbasket role 21 Even though Ukraine is renowned as the the frequency of droughts and thus have a breadbasket of Europe, food security does not negative impact on agriculture. rank high in international comparisons. The Economist Global Food Security Index Most future climate predictions are based ranked Ukraine as 45th in a list of 105 ranked on GCM, which expect an overall increase in countries. Two factors negatively affect Ukrainian precipitation in the region. However, there are food security: (i) a high share of household conflicting estimates on the potential impact expenditure is dedicated to food, and (ii) the of these changes on agriculture. For instance, volatility of agricultural production is higher than according to a recent Ukrainian study23 based the average of other countries22. on the Geophysics Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) model, a 30 percent increase of The volatility of agricultural production is caused greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, winter wheat by high dependency on natural precipitation since yields are expected to increase by 37 percent by only 2 percent of cropland is irrigated. In turn, 2030-2040 mainly due to increase in temperature. natural precipitation is affected by significant However this study does not consider other inter-annual and seasonal variability. It is expected factors such as soil, land management, or crop that climate change and increasing variability will behaviours. A previous study by the International further exacerbate the already high volatility of Institute for Applied Systems Analysis24 predicted agricultural production and thus negatively affect that yields of rainfed high-input cereals in food security. Indeed, high production variability southern Ukraine would decrease by 10 percent in Ukraine may have implications for global trade by 2050 and by 17 percent by 2080. This second and world price volatility. study is based on the different conditions of agro- ecological zones within the country. The second major climatic constraint is the temperature: high temperatures increase The difference in the above estimates highlights evapotranspiration (plants’ water demand) and the lack of robust climate analysis in terms of heat waves (above 33°C) can damage crops seasonal variability, time-lines, baselines used, and reduce production. Historical trends show and overall assessment of a range of climate that during the past half century the average models outputs and associated uncertainties temperature of the country has been increasing for the interpretation of predicted impacts. significantly. Consequently it is important to understand the inherent uncertainties of each model in their Increasing temperatures may have some positive ability to predict a changing climate. impact in the colder and more humid regions in the north of Ukraine, where extremely cold Projections of grain production and export temperatures cause winterkill and consequent increases are based on assumptions of productivity loss. However, in the south of the increasing trends in yields and in increasing country, where water availability is a limiting arable land suitable for specific crops. However, factor, increasing temperatures and increasing most grain productivity projections do not take variability in rain events are expected to increase 23 Ibid, compared with a baseline of 1995-2009 average yields. 24 Fischer, G., F. Nachtergaele, S. Prieler, H.T. van Velthuizen, 21 For further details see Annex 4. L. Verelst, D. Wiberg, 2008, compared with the baseline 22 56 percent of total household expenditures are dedicated average yields of 1961-1990 based on experiments to food against an average of 39 percent, while standard with four General Circulation Models (GCM), and the deviation of agricultural productivity is 0.17 versus 0.1 assessment of four basic SRES scenarios from IPCC Third (http://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Country/Details#Ukraine). Assessment Report. 7 Figure 8: In southern Ukraine, soil moisture has been halving Wheat Coarse grains Forest Forest Steppe Steppe Mountain Location: Bashtanka, in the Steppe (soil moisture in mm of water in the first meter of soil on May 28 of every year under wheat) 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 . Source: Adamenko 2012, presentation on “Agrometeorological monitoring and climate change in Ukraine” into account changes due to variability in the as expected by many models, this will create a frequency of extreme events, such as droughts serious obstacle to agricultural productivity. and frosts. The potential changes in variability and extreme events – frosts, heat waves, Additional modelling studies26 indicate that droughts, and heavy rains – are likely to have a although large parts of Ukraine might increase stronger impact on food production than shifts in their agricultural potential under warming temperature and precipitation. scenarios, agriculture in the semi-arid southern zone – where most fertile Chernozem soils are Although several climatic models predict that concentrated – could suffer a dramatic increase in a warmer climate would be beneficial for frequency of droughts. agriculture in Ukraine25, geographic distribution of benefits is unlikely to be uniform. This can also be Finally, any projection of agricultural expansion seen by historic trends of reduced soil moisture based on climate change scenarios should be in the southern part of the country (see Figure 8). viewed with caution, if they do not take into If these historical trends continue in the future, account other regional socio-economic factors, such as land degradation, access to improved 25 Pegov et al., 2000; Fischer et al., 2002; 2005; Parry et al., 2004). 26 Alcamo et al. (2007) and Dronin and Kirilenko (2008). 8 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience crops, etc.27 Expansion of climatic zones suitable Assessment of human vulnerability and for agriculture does not necessarily imply that adaptation to climate change needs to become the local population currently employed in other a key component of agricultural policies. sectors would seek out new opportunities Adaptation, such as implementation of large- in agriculture, or will be prepared to change scale soil-water conservation measures (i.e. agricultural practices such as use of improved no till), introduction of drought resistant crop seed varieties. On the other hand, declining varieties and development of irrigation are crucial productivity due to increasing aridity in the to increase climate resilience and food security. southern area of Ukraine may result in the loss of human capital as skilled farmers may be forced to switch to other livelihoods. 27 Lioubimtseva, 2010. 9 5. Soil fertility and climate change resistance The productivity of a soil depends on its physical, replenish underground water reserves, and chemical and biological properties and, in in storing atmospheric carbon. The latter can particular, on its mineral composition, organic contribute to a further decrease in the already matter content and biological activity. Appropriate low or very low organic carbon content in many levels of SOM ensure soil fertility and minimize lands in Europe and badly affects soil structure agricultural impact on the environment. and biodiversity. It is estimated that globally some The EEA states that despite erosion being a 5-10 million hectares are being lost annually natural phenomenon, several human activities, to severe degradation and declining yields (or such as forest clearance and inappropriate increased input requirements to compensate). farming practices, increase soil loss (EEA, This includes physical degradation by water 2005). Unsustainable land management and wind, crusting, sealing and waterlogging; practices, which are degrading soils and are biological degradation due to organic matter consequently reducing the fertility of the land depletion and loss of soil flora and fauna; and include: continuous cropping with reductions in chemical degradation by acidification, nutrient fallow and rotations, soil preparation methods depletion, pollution from excessive use of based on mouldboard tillage, organic matter pesticides and fertilizers or human and industrial removal, overstocking, overgrazing and burning waste. of rangelands, over-exploitation or clearance of wooded and forest lands (Van Muysen and The Pan-European Soil Erosion Risk Assessment Govers, 2002; Marques da Silva and Alexandre, estimates that almost a quarter of Europe’s 2004; Li et al., 2007). These practices are land is at some risk of erosion. Risk is defined reducing the productive capacities of croplands, as “high” or “very high” for 10 million hectares rangelands and forests worldwide while of Europe’s lands and “moderate” on a further inducing farmers to apply more artificial inputs to 27 million hectares (European Environment maintain production (Lobb et al., 1995; Lobb and Agency [EEA], 2005). Eroded soils are apt to Lindstrom, 1999; Reicosky et al., 2005). suffer from supplementary degradation such as reduced efficiency in filtering pollution, in From an environmental perspective, degraded capturing water to sustain crop production or soils are at greater risk from the damaging Figure 9: Soil organic matter and water holding capacity 500 450 400 350 300 litres/ha 250 200 150 100 50 0 1 2 3 SOM, percent Source: Jones, 2006. 10 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience impacts of climate change due to loss of SOM Second, soil protection through organic matter and soil biodiversity, increased soil compaction and the higher presence of large water-stable and increased rates of soil erosion and landslides. soil aggregates enhances resistance against Organic matter works like glue keeping soil water and wind erosion (Puget et al., 1995; particles together improving their structure. Thus Balabane et al., 2005). Third, water infiltration organic matter increases the resistance of soil to rate is a function of the initial water content and mechanical disturbance, such as those produced soil porosity. Porosity and its distribution down by raindrops falling on the ground. That is why the profile depend on soil texture and structure, fertile soils with high organic matter content aggregate stability, SOM content and therefore are more resistant to heavy rains, less prone to on the type, shape and size of soil structural erosion, and have higher infiltration. units; the presence of channels created by roots, mesofauna and macrofauna also play a Proper soil management can also influence role. In low clay soils, organic matter is the main rainwater infiltration and the capacity of the stabilizer of soil aggregates and pores; neither silt soil to reduce soil water evaporation and store nor sand have cohesive (i.e. plastic) properties. water in the soil profile. Soil protected by a Therefore, soil management in general, and CA superficial layer of organic matter, as in CA in particular, can influence rainwater infiltration systems, improves the capture and the use of and increase the effectiveness of rainfall, rainfall through increased water absorption and enhancing productivity, reducing rates of erosion, infiltration and decreased evaporation from the dispersion of soil particles and reducing risks of soil surface. This leads to reduced runoff and waterlogging and salinity. soil erosion and higher soil moisture throughout the season compared with unprotected soils (Kronen, 1994; Duiker and Lal, 2000; Post and Kwon, 2000; Knowles and Singh, 2003; Baker, 2007; Bationo et al., 2007). This is due to three separate processes. First, SOM plays a major role in absorbing water at low moisture potentials. A 1 percent increase of SOM in the top 30 cm of soil can hold 144 000 litres of water, which is available for crop needs (Figure 9). This is why soils rich in organic matter increase crop resilience to droughts. 11 6. Approaches to address soil erosion Sustainable land management approaches to to measure profitability). The problem with no- reduce soil erosion can be classified as land use till alone is that weed and pest management regimes, agronomic and vegetative measures, becomes challenging over time. Therefore, in and structural measures, as seen in Table 4. order to be fully sustainable over time, it needs to be combined together with soil cover and crop However, no-till stands out in terms of profitability rotation. The combination of these three elements per tonne of carbon dioxide sequestered, as is called conservation agriculture by FAO. shown in Figure 10 (note the logarithmic scale Table 4: Sustainable land management approaches Land use regimes Agronomic & vegetative measures Structural measures • Watershed plans • Intercropping • Terraces and other physical measures • Community land use plans • Natural regeneration (e.g. soil bunds, stone bunds, bench terraces, etc.) • Grazing agreements, • Agroforestry closures, etc. • Flood control and drainage measures • Afforestation and reforestation (e.g. rock catchment’ water • Soil and water conservation • No tillage harvesting, cut-off drains, vegetative zones waterways, stone-paved waterways, • Mulching and crop residue • Vegetation corridors flood water diversion, etc.) • Crop rotation • Water harvesting, runoff management, • Fallowing and small-scale irrigation (shallow • Composting/green manure wells / boreholes, micro ponds, • Integrated pest management underground cisterns, percolation pits, ponds, spring development, roof water • Vegetative strip cover harvesting, river bed dams, stream • Contour planting diversion weir, farm dam, tie ridges, • Re-vegetation of rangelands inter-row water harvesting, half-moon structures, etc.) • Integrated crop-livestock systems • Gully control measures (e.g. stone • Woodlots check dams, brushwood check dams, • Live fencing gully cut/reshaping and filling, gully • Alternatives to woodfuel re-vegetation, etc) • Sand dune stabilization Source: World Bank 2012. Figure 10: Profitability and carbon sequestration of sustainable land management approaches Source: Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils (World Bank report #67395-GLB). 12 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience The FAO definition28 of conservation agriculture or black carbon, a little known but increasingly (CA) is: important cause of climate change; and • diversification of crop species grown in An approach to managing agro-ecosystems sequences and/or associations crop rotation for improved and sustained productivity, is achieved with crop rotation and/or increased profits and food security while intercropping. preserving and enhancing the resource base and the environment. CA is characterized by , which CA is distinguished from “minimum tillage” three linked principles, namely: means reducing to some extent the traditional mouldboard ploughing29, which includes turning • continuous minimum mechanical soil the soil. Minimum-till and no-till are often jointly disturbance; . referred to as “resource-saving technologies” • permanent organic soil cover; and While minimum tillage does present important • diversification of crop species grown in benefits, long-term international trials and studies sequences and/or associations. have proved that the combination of the above three practices is essential to maximize benefit. This approach is practised on around For instance: 125 million ha globally (9 percent of global arable land), and it is increasing at a rate of around • no-till with crop residue coverage but no 6 million ha per year. Although this is more than rotation presents the risk that weed and pest twice the adoption rate of organic farming, control will become unmanageable over time; public knowledge about CA is much lower than • ploughing an area previously under CA does that about organic farming. CA includes a set significantly reduce its soil organic matter of farm practices that produce sustainable and and therefore it reduces its soil water holding synergic benefits when adopted simultaneously capacity, which is the key element to soil and continuously. With this approach, weeds drought resistance; it also determines a are controlled chemically rather than through reversal of the benefits gained; and cultivation (that is why the cost of herbicides can initially increase). CA still requires other • no-till without crop residues risks causing soil agricultural practices such as fertilization and compaction. Integrated Pest Management in a way similar but not identical to traditional ploughing. When the Although the above three farm practices are above farm practices are applied continuously, the minimum requirements additional practices they significantly improve soil fertility and can be included to improve soil fertility, such as produce more and more sustainable benefits inclusion of multiannual crops (such as pastures) than each individual practice alone. The three or windbreaks. principles can be further explained as follows: The term “resource-saving technologies” is used in the Former Soviet Union (FSU) to mean • continuous minimum soil disturbance is without distinction CA, no-till, and minimum till. . This is the commonly known as “no-till” See Annex 5 for more detail on this. practice of sowing without tillage, also called “direct seeding”(the practice of seeding directly into unprepared soil); • permanent organic soil cover can be achieved using crop residues, mulching, or cover crops. It requires a total stop to burning crop residues, a farm practice which produces soot 28 http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/1a.html. . 29 British spelling “mouldboard plough” 13 7. CA feasibility in Ukraine Ukrainian scientists have concerns about the process so that locally adapted practices are feasibility of CA/no-till technology in the country. utilized to implement CA principles. When CA is The main concerns include the following: a new concept and there is little local experience to draw from, farmers will need to learn about CA • soil-related (soils too hard, sandy, stony, over practices and adapt them to suit their conditions. moisturized, gleyish); Adoption of CA practices occurs gradually as • climate-related (cold moist spring delaying farmers become more familiar with both the nitrification processes and causing nitrogen theory and the practice of CA methods. This deficit); can be done by slowly reducing mechanical soil • technical (excess of weeds, rodents, and disturbance, going in the direction of minimum pests/diseases); tillage, and/or by incrementally developing the three practices of Conservation Agriculture, • organizational (need to invest in specialized beginning with a small part of the farm. machinery and related technical assistance, financial constraints and Without a specific and organized public sector overuse/management of herbicides and support, this technological change may take a agrochemicals). long time or it can be accelerated with enabling support. That is why several European regions As discussed with some scientists, these are moving in the direction of providing specific concerns can all be addressed through practical subsidies for CA adoption. For the same reason learning on soil- and farm-specific cases. the United States Department of Agriculture Moreover, it is being acknowledged that while the (USDA) includes (with a rigorous protocol) the no- price of fuel has been increasing in the past few till practice in the Farm Bill. years, the price of commonly used herbicides in CA/no till practices has been decreasing. This is increasing the benefits of CA adoption. CA experiments in Ukraine Trials30 carried out on yield comparisons International experience shows that initial show controversial results when comparing hesitation toward this technology is normal. CA traditional, minimum- and no-till technologies. adoption is a slow process, usually requiring Admittedly, it is recognized that in these trials decades. This is due to several reasons: the no-till technology is applied improperly. In (i) ploughing is the quintessence of crop fact, depending on which crop is included in the cultivation. Abandoning such a basic tradition rotation even the no-till field is ploughed on that is culturally challenging; (ii) some benefits occasion. This single operation cancels all the – particularly those dealing with soil health gains the technology was re-establishing on that improvement and environmental services – given soil. materialize increasingly as time goes on, whereas others such as improvements in profit, savings on In terms of soil humus content - which has been production inputs, reduction in erosion and other computed while comparing the three technologies forms of soil degradation can be harnessed from on soils which had a high SOM starting point the beginning; (iii) farm management and weed (above 4 percent) – gains were marginal but control require a significant shift in approach to evident at the first ten (0-10 cm) and first twenty how crop establishment and weed management operations are implemented. Farmers can do 30 Presentation made by Professor S.A. Balyuk during round- much to innovate during the uptake and adoption table discussions in Kyiv on 23 May, 2013. 14 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 5: Ukraine: chlorophyll content in winter wheat leaves Traditional ploughing Mini-till No-till In standard units with N-tester 48.5 50.1 52.8 Source: SSAcI O.N. Sokolovsky (Kharkiv, May, 2013). (0-20 cm) centimetres of the soil. Otherwise at All such trials would, however, need be repeated 10-20 cm and at 20-30 cm, very slight decreases extensively and at different locations and (0.02 percent and 0.14 percent) were recorded. conditions – in full respect of each technology’s An interesting trial, which is being conducted by correct protocol – and be accordingly SSAI, on the chlorophyll content of crop leaves for documented to have formal scientific recognition. the three technologies shows that with no-till the plants are able to photosynthesize better. 15 8. CA adoption in Ukraine 31 Table 6: Ukraine: estimated adoption of resource-saving technologies, million ha, 1990-2009 Percent Technology 1990 2000 2005 2009 of total Traditional/ploughing 29.5 19.5 10.0 4.9 18 Minimum tillage 2.0 7.5 17.0 21.9 80 No-till 0 0.2 0.5 0.7 2 Total 31.5 27.2 27.5 27.5 100 Source: Team elaborations and Agrosoyuz information, 2013. In the absence of official statistics, the evolution land resource management and an increased of land/seed bed preparation technologies in use frequency of drought events. On top of this, in Ukraine has been estimated with the advice of countries like the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan farmers32, practitioners and agriculture machinery and Ukraine which are important international suppliers, who all have their own networks and cereal producers and exporters, have also had to observatories. struggle to keep up their competiveness in global markets33. Depending on the agro-ecological This estimate lends itself to some immediate and economic situation of each country, these comments: challenges have had a different importance and level of priority in different countries. In Ukraine, • resource-saving technologies appear to have given the prevalence of its black Chernozem soils picked up steadily since independence with a (which, as discussed, have inherent higher SOM strong impetus during the last 15 years; content and more resilient chemical-physical • minimum-tillage is currently the most popular properties), scientists and farmers appear to have land preparation technology in use; prioritized two of the challenges: fighting against erosion and improving farm competitiveness by • traditional land preparation through ploughing reducing fuel consumption. Since 2007 MAPFU has greatly decreased with an apparent trend has promoted the use of resource-saving towards being definitely substituted; techniques and technologies34 as a strategic line • no-till was introduced in the late 1990s and of concern and action. has been increasing slowly ever since; • overall cultivated area is struggling to move Ukrainian farmers have given precedence to back to pre-independence levels. the less demanding – in terms of adaptation requirements – minimum tillage technology as Such trends are similar to those in many other compared with the more complex CA/ no-till. FSU countries. Most of these countries in their progress towards a post-Soviet Union 33 As CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) agriculture agricultural modernization have had to face underwent transition following the breakup of the Soviet challenging issues such as growing erosion, Union, the Russian Federation, Ukraine and Kazakhstan removed approximately 23 million hectares of arable land decreasing soil fertility, and soil moisture from production. This was the largest withdrawal of arable land from production worldwide in recent history. Of the impoverishment resulting from inadequate 23 million hectares of arable land excluded from production in the three countries, almost 90% had been used to produce grain, including about 4 million hectares in Ukraine. Some of the non-marginal excluded from production in 31 For further details see Annex 5. Ukraine, can be returned to production http://www.fao.org/ 32 Personal communication and presentation made by newsroom/common/ecg/1000808/en/faoebrd.pdf. representatives of the JSC AgroSoyuz in Dnipropetrovsk on 34 Agriculture State Programme till 2015; September 19, 2007 , March 13, 2013. N. 1158 (http://minagro.gov.ua/apk?nid=2976). 16 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience The main areas of concern (erosion and fuel However, meetings that occurred during this consumption) seem to have been - from the study with the most concerned stakeholders farmers’ point of view - addressed by minimum – the farmers – confirm that there is growing tillage technology or have become less evident professional interest in CA/no-till. Ukrainian to an extent which is considered quite adequate farmers do not appear at all to be entrenched in at current scientific/technical knowledge and old methods and are eager to learn more about investment/organizational capacity levels. what benefits technology can provide for them. Farmers in Ukraine however, do not have It is the same situation for researchers in soil and sufficient evidence on both the incremental and related sciences. They are ready and willing to more sustainable benefits that can accrue by invest more time and effort in understanding how adopting CA on their farms; as well as on the technology can best be adapted to the different appropriate expedients and adaptations that agro-ecological conditions and specific farming need to be used in different soil/climate/cropping needs of the country. pattern/organizational situations. The experience and evidence accumulated by the large farms that have adopted the CA technology are still insufficient for meaningful comparison; data are not regular or have not always been collected consistently. In other words they are not convincing to the broader audience. In turn, scientists have insufficient means, outdated fundamental information (e.g. on the actual state and behaviour of their soils), and have had little to no exposure to international research networks working in this area. 17 9. Potential benefits from CA adoption Table 7: Ukraine: soil erosion under different tillage, 2011/12 Soil practice Soil erosion (kg/m2/year) Ploughing 6 Mini-till 4.5 No-till 3 Source: In-field personal communication (SCAI of Donetsk). May, 2013. CA principles are universally applicable to all enhancing moisture retention and minimizing soil agricultural landscapes and land uses with locally compaction37. adapted practices. CA enhances biodiversity and natural biological processes above and below CA is also credited for limiting erosion damage the ground surface. Soil interventions such as from run-off38 and flooding. According to on- mechanical soil disturbance are reduced to an going field trials in Ukraine39, CA/no-till produces absolute minimum or avoided , and external 35 50 percent less soil loss per year compared with inputs such as agrochemicals and plant nutrients traditional land preparation technologies and of mineral or organic origin are applied optimally 25 percent less (per year) when compared with and in ways and quantities that do not interfere minimum tillage. with, or disrupt, the biological processes. However, the real effects of CA can be seen CA facilitates good agronomy, such as better in the medium to longer term40 as a more timely operations, and improves overall land sustainable equilibrium is established, which will husbandry for rainfed and irrigated production. eventually show that erosion is further reduced at Complemented by other known good practices, least by 75 percent. There is ample evidence that including the use of good quality seeds, integrated CA/no-till contributes to the gradual regeneration pest, nutrient, weed and water management, etc. of the inherent soil structure features and it CA is a base for the intensification of sustainable improves its “anti”- erosion impact, which is agricultural production. It offers increased options eventually further reduced to at least its inherent for integration of production sectors, such as crop- technical minimum (20-25 percent). livestock integration and the integration of trees and pastures into agricultural landscapes. Crop yield variability can also be addressed positively by expanding CA adoption. Crops under continued CA/no-till technology are Specific advantages for Ukraine acknowledged to give higher or at least equal CA practices are known to produce several positive outcomes, including the reduction of soil erosion36; 37 Influence of Soil Tillage on Soil Compaction Barbora Badali´kova A.P .Dedousis and T. Bartzanas (eds.), Soil Engineering, Soil Biology 20, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642- 03681-1_2, # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010 http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_ downloaddocument/9783642036804-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0- 35 The maximum soil disturbance area that is accepted by the 45-1001451-p173919206. CA protocol is 20-25 percent. 38 Stewart B. et al., 2008 “Comparison of runoff and soil erosion 36 Among available literature see e.g.: Javůrek et al., Impact from no-till and inversion tillage production systems” http:// of different soil tillage technologies on soil erosion, 2008 www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/person/6112/sr1083_08.pdf. (2): 218-223; Volker Prasuhn, On-farm effects of tillage and crops on soil erosion measured over 10 years in 39 National Soils and Agro-chemistry Institute in Kharkiv. Switzerland, 2011; Wang et al., Dust storm erosion in China, Personal communication, May 2013. 2006; Sugahara et al., Erosion control on pineapple fields, 40 Derpsch, R. et al., Critical Steps to No-Till Adoption, 2008, 2000; Doyle, Reducing erosion in tobacco fields, 1983; etc. WASWC. p479 - 495 http://www.rolf-derpsch.com/steps.pdf. 18 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 11: Soil bulk density under different tillage Source: Kravchenko et al. 2011: Chin. Geogra. Sci. 21(3) 257-266. yields to that achieved with minimum tillage41. management system can optimize soil The significance of such yields differences conditions. Once again, CA/no-till is an important depends on the starting point level. In the land resource management technology that is Ukrainian context the perception of the benefits also able to mitigate soil moisture decreases by may be masked by high thresholds that prevail maximizing SOM, consequently enhancing its in the country. However, it is proven in several physical structure and water holding capacity44. instances that CA/no-till performs better under drought conditions. An assumption can be From the cost of production savings stand-point, legitimately made that the yield shortfalls (of and particularly in terms of fuel consumption there 20-25 percent) which occur in drought years is wide consensus that ploughing is by far the most in Ukraine, could be mitigated by at least 25- fuel consuming technology. This is greatly reduced 35 percent through CA/no-till adoption, based on when moving to minimum tillage, and is further what happens in other countries with comparable reduced with no-till. This is shown by research trials agro-ecological conditions42. In any case, the and farm management experiences in Ukraine. yields under CA in the medium-term tend to stabilize and significantly reduce the volatility The potential advantages of adopting CA/ which is usually caused by climatic variation . On 43 no-till technology in Ukraine in comparison a large scale, the impact on Ukrainian economics with minimum tillage have been highlighted and on food security is also considerable. throughout this assessment and can be summarized in Table 8. With regard to bulk density, typically this property is influenced by the land preparation technology 43 Relationships between winter wheat yields and soil carbon that is in use (Kravchenko et al. 2011: Chin. under various tillage systems. O. Mikanová, T. Šimon, M. Javůrek, M. Vach Crop Research Institute, Prague-Ruzyně, Geogra. Sci. 21(3) 257-266). Czech Republic. Plant Soil Environ., 58, 2012 (12): 540-544 www.agriculturejournals.cz/publicFiles/78760.pdf; Compari- son of no-tillage and conventional tillage in the development This clearly shows how land management has a of sustainable farming systems in the semi-arid tropics. Thigalingam et al., Australian Journal of Experimental Agricul- strong influence on the behaviour and dynamics ture, 1996, 36, 995-1002. http://www.bobmccown.com/wp- of the different soil properties. An appropriate content/uploads/2011/10/112_Thiagalingam_McCown1996No- TillVsConventionalSAT1.pdf; Differential response of wheat to tillage management systems in a semiarid area of Morocco; Rachid Mrabet Field Crops Research 66 (2000) 165±174; Soil properties and crop yields after 11 years of no tillage farming 41 The concept of soil quality : new perspective of nature in wheat-maize cropping system in North China Plain; He farming and sustainable agriculture ; Papendick et al. Jin et al. Soil & Tillage Research 113 (2011) 48-54; Effects 1991 http://www.infrc.or.jp/english/KNF_Data_Base_Web/ of Residue Management and Cropping Systems on Wheat PDF%20KNF%20Conf%20Data/C4-5-129.pdf. Yield Stability in a Semiarid Mediterranean Clay Soil. Mrabe. 42 See also “Advancement and impact of conservation American Journal of Plant Sciences, 2011, 2, 202-216. agriculture/no-till technology adoption in Kazakhstan”: http:// 44 Impact of three and seven years of no-tillage on the soil www.eastagri.org/publications/pub_docs/Info%20note_ water storage, in the plant root zone; Jema et al. Soil & Print.pdf; and, “No-till technology in Kazakhstan” by Turi Tillage Research 126 (2013) 26-33; Soil fertility distributions Fileccia (2009), posted on FAO’s Conservation Agriculture in long-term no-till, chisel/disk and mouldboard plough/disk website. (http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/doc/Importance_Zero_ systems; Sjoerd W. et al; Soil & Tillage Research 88 (2006) Tillage_Northern_Kazakhstan.pdf). 30-41. 19 Table 8: Comparison of no-till versus minimum till (potential) Problem Through minimum tillage Through CA/no-till Erosion: estimated to cause 500-600 million Reduced by 25 percent (per Reduced immediately by Tonnes of eroded soil: tonnes of annual soil loss; About 14-15 million ha) 50 percent. With continued 0.75-7t/ha only hectares are affected by wind/water erosion CA/no-till: by 75 percent, to a (update 2013); increasing at a rate of about minimum (per ha) 60,000-80,000 hectares per year; and equal to 3-30 tonnes/ha of soil per year, depending on regions Soil fertility/SOM: 24 million tonnes of Same as per erosion Same as per erosion 117 USD/ha of NPK annual humus loss (including 964 thousand = 25 percent less = 50 percent; 75 percent less Nutrients tonnes of nitrogen, 676 thousand tonnes of phosphorus 9.7 million tonnes of potassium) from tilled land. This is equal to about 5 billion USD Resilience to drought: at current climatic Improved moisture retention Soil nominal moisture See productivity gains prevailing conditions and in those foreseen capacity retention capacity fully due to climate change evaporation rates re-established mitigating increase and soil humidity decreases; productivity volatility with dire events every 3-5 years or shorter frequency Production volatility: subject to Insufficient to mitigate Production volatility mitigated 77 USD/ha every 3 years or 20 to 25 percent yield reduction in average significantly production by 25-35 percent 25 USD/ha/year every 3 years volatility Cost of production: Reduced fuel use by Reduced fuel use by Production costs reduction high fuel consumption with traditional 40 percent 60 percent technology (average 100 litres/ ha) = average 60 litres /ha = average 30 litres per ha GHG mitigation, carbon sequestration Sequestration rates at In the short-term: baseline conditions for 2000- CO2 Sequestration of 2039 170 kg/ha/year The above indications (and references) show that CA/no-till technology provides higher benefits even when compared with minimum tillage. This together with a number of other described beneficial effects would justify a gradual but more decisive move towards adoption of this technology in Ukraine. 20 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience 10. Soil carbon sequestration Table 9: Ukraine fuel consumption under different land preparation, 2011/12 Soil practice Fuel consumption (litres/ha) Ploughing 90-120 Mini-till 60-80 No-till 25-40 Source: Farm managers; Researchers. 2013. The adoption of CA has an impact in terms of the case of one unpublished trial done at farm level46 GHG balance45. Emissions are reduced at field and comparing three technologies (conventional, level because of very low topsoil disturbance by minimum tillage and no-till), bulk density and tillage and thanks to the maintenance of a mulch “equivalent” soil depth measurements are not cover. This results in higher carbon retention reported. Thus, the scientific confidence in the capacity in the soil. The reduced mechanized end results is not authoritative. operations also imply a permanent decrease of fossil fuel consumption. Only one scientific paper reports C stocks in a typical Chernozem of Ukraine under different However, in Ukraine, carbon sequestration long-term tillage systems47. However its results advantages that derive from the adoption of CA cannot be applied to average farm conditions in practices appear less evident. As the soil carbon Ukraine: this experiment applied large amounts content of the Chernozems is already inherently of fertilizers and cattle manure (at a rate of high, reaching several undertones of carbon per 12 tonnes per hectare). Such levels of application hectare in the top meter, it is really difficult in are unusual in Ukraine, and they surely had a the short-term to appreciate a variation of a few greater impact on SOM concentration than tillage hundred kilos of carbon. The calculation of soil practices. Thus, the tillage effect was masked in C sequestration rates in Ukraine would require this experiment. detailed and high quality determination of soil organic carbon (SOC) and of soil bulk density. Based on the IPCC global proxies referred to When calculating soil C sequestration rates, specific climate categories, the corresponding approaches being used and sampling methods carbon sequestration rates proposed for no-till and are also crucial. It is very important to take into residues management category is 0.15 tonnes account any previous change in soil bulk density, CO2-eq/ha/yr- for the cool dry zone; and and the equivalent depth of the soil sample taken. 0.51 tonnes CO2-eq /ha/yr for the cool moist zone. Only a few scientific publications are available Together with the above fuel savings, the total concerning the evaluation of carbon sequestration annual carbon sequestration can be estimated performance of reduced-tillage technologies at around 0.5 tonnes CO2/ha/yr-. These values compared with conventional systems in Ukraine. would generate significant impact only if applied None discuss comparisons with true CA/no-till to large areas. A more detailed assessment technology. It also appears that results have been biased by a combination of tillage effects with 46 Done at Agrosoyuz JSC in 2011 and reported in a the use of organic and inorganic fertilizers. In the presentation during May 23rd Round Table discussions in Kyiv, 2013. 47 Kravchenko, Y., Rogovska, N., Petrenko, L., Zhang, X., Song, C. and Chen, Y. 2012. “Quality and dynamics of soil organic matter in a typical Chernozem of Ukraine under different 45 For more details on this see Annex 6. long-term tillage systems”. In: Can. J. Soil Sci. 92: 429-438. 21 of CA adoption should be compared with the All such aspects would justify the prioritization business as usual scenario of suboptimal land of Climate Smart Agriculture measures management practices meaning: continued and specifically, the expansion of CA/no-till erosion; sustained loss of SOC; and decreased investment in the Steppe area of Ukraine. organic fertilization. In the short-term (three to five years), if adequate CA/no-till is a long-term undertaking. Experience financial resources are made available and ad from countries48 and farms that have successfully hoc development interventions are supported, it moved to CA/no-till show that it is not just a is assumed that the CA/no-till area will grow to gradual improvement from minimum tillage, but three million hectares in the Steppe area. This a qualitative jump ahead in terms of production, criteria of prioritization implies that the agricultural economic and environmental benefits. enterprises with an operational cropping area of 4 000 hectares and above, would act as first champions in CA technology adoption. Phasing CA adoption So far, this assessment acknowledges In the medium-term (six to ten years), with the following key facts and a few specific continued state support, and the greater assumptions: evidence and awareness of the benefits for farmers, the entire Steppe area managed by (i) almost one-half (19 million hectares) of the agricultural enterprises would probably take up arable land is located in the Steppe AEZ of CA; starting with a further 3 million hectares Ukraine; (enterprises with 2 000 ha and above), and (ii) about 60 percent of the arable land in eventually including the total 9 million ha the country is managed by agricultural managed by enterprises. enterprises; over half of these are situated in the Steppe AEZ; In the longer term but it could happen sooner (iii) the Steppe area produces 45 percent of – all farmland including the Forest Steppe area wheat, 15 percent of corn and 47 percent of operated by enterprises – i.e. 17 million hectares, sunflower output; has the potential to adopt CA. (iv) the Steppe area is the most affected by erosion, soil fertility loss, and negative climate change impacts; (v) the Steppe area has highest output volatility; (vi) as of 2012, CA/no-till adoption is an undertaking exclusively of large organized farms (> 4 000 hectares); it is noted that a majority of such farmland (estimated at 70 percent) is located in the Steppe area; there is a good level of “readiness to (vii) convert” given the existing capacity of direct seeding machinery among large agricultural enterprises: over two thousand 6-12 metre wide seeders have been sold in Ukraine during the last five years, each capable of operating in average 2 000 hectares. It is assumed that 50 percent of these are in the Steppe AEZ. 48 Current status of adoption of no-till farming in the world and some of its main benefits; Rolf Derpsch, March, 2010 Int. J Agric. &.Biol Eng., Vol. 3 No.1. 22 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience 11. Benefits and economics of CA Figure 12: Total investment and net present value 2 500 8 000 2 291 7 000 6 685 2 000 1 883 6 000 5 523 5 000 4 723 1 500 1 201 4 000 1 000 3 000 2 000 500 1 000 0 0 Conventional Min.Tillage No-Till Conventional Min.Tillage No-Till Total investment, thousand USD NPV, thousand USD Source: Team estimates. Figure 13: Net income per hectare by technology 450 387 400 350 300 282 250 219 200 150 100 50 0 Conventional Min.tillage No-Till Net income per ha, USD Source: Team estimates. The potential benefits of large-scale adoption of The performance of a 4 000 hectare agriculture CA in Ukraine have been carefully quantified at enterprise in comparison with other technology three levels: farm/enterprise, national, and global. use is clear, as can be seen in Figure 12 and Figure 13. Farm/enterprise level With almost double investment compared with The adoption of CA technology is expected conventional tillage, an enterprise that adopts to lead to significant economic and financial CA/no-till can expect a net present value (NPV) efficiency in grain and oil seeds production by: of over USD 6.6 million; and about USD 390 in • increasing output stability; terms of net income per ha/per year. • decreasing inputs use and cost; Based on the figures assumed in this analysis • increasing productivity or efficiency; and (3 million hectares in the short to medium- term; 9 million hectares in the medium-term; and 17 million hectares in the longer term), the 23 Figure 14: Incremental net income by technology 2,31 1,23 0,41 3 million hectares 9 million hectares 17 million hectares Source: Team estimates. Figure 15: Annual fuel savings by technology 625 331 110 3 million hectares 9 million hectares 17 million hectares Source: Team estimates. average accumulated benefit from the introduction baseline scenario. In the case of conventional CA/no-till (intended as additional net income of tillage technology, the analysis generates a agricultural enterprises) would amount to: negative return (NPV) if prices decrease by more than 24 percent. • short-term: USD 0.41 billion; • medium-term: USD 1.23 billion; National level • long-term: USD 2.31 billion. The main benefits at the national level consist Importantly, the decreased annual fuel essentially in reduced cereal output volatility. The consumption cost which is considered a farm/ estimated additional output of cereals (wheat and enterprise level benefit would be: corn) available during drought years (every three years) would be: • short-term: USD 110 million saved; • short-term: 0.3 million tonnes of wheat and • medium-term: USD 331 million saved; 0.6 million tonnes of corn; • long-term, USD 625 million saved. • medium-term: 1 million tonnes of wheat and A sensitivity analysis was also performed. A CA/ 1.7 million tonnes ofcorn; no-till farm would probably remain profitable even • long-term: 2 million tonnes of wheat and if grain sale prices fell by 34 percent from the 3.3 million tonnes of corn. 24 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 16: Incremental production by scenario Wheat, in million tonnes Corn, in million tonnes 3,25 1,98 1,72 1,05 0,57 0,35 3 million hectares 9 million hectares 17 million hectares 3 million hectares 9 million hectares 17 million hectares Source: FAO OECD Agricultural Outlook 2013-22. Figure 17: Incremental value by scenario 304 161 54 3 million hectares 9 million hectares 17 million hectares Source: Team estimates This additional supply of cereals is expected to Global level generate off-farm benefits (mainly to traders At a global level, the benefit is estimated in and intermediaries). In drought years (once terms of improved food security during the every three years) these additional benefits are drought years (every three years). Considering estimated at: a consumption of 130 kg of cereals/per capita/ • short-term: USD 54 million; per year (FAO/WFP average calorie intake), the • medium-term: USD 161 million; increased supply of cereals deriving from CA/no- till area would be able to a feed further: • long-term: USD 304 million. • short-term: 5.4 million people; More significant in value terms is the decreased • medium-term: 16.1 million people; soil fertility loss. This would reduce the equivalent • long-term: 30.4 million people. nutrient investment (which is otherwise required to keep up crop productivity) by USD 117/ha giving a total saving of: • short-term: USD 0.35 billion; • medium-term: USD 1.05 billion; • long-term: USD 1.99 billion. 25 Figure 18: Nutrient savings by scenario 1,99 1,05 0,35 3 million hectares 9 million hectares 17 million hectares Figure 19: Incremental food security by scenario 30,4 16,1 5,4 3 million hectares 9 million hectares 17 million hectares Source: Team estimates. Benefits in terms of carbon sequestration and The market values of the above carbon emissions decreased emissions have been calculated are difficult to estimate. Carbon markets are using EX-ACT . They were estimated as 49 diverse, unstable and unreliable. The price of a three snapshots according to the three above tonne of CO2 can range from USD 0.5 per tonne scenarios: according to the NASDAQ Certified Emission Reduction to USD 4.44 according to EU CO2 • adoption of CA in 3 million ha: 1.5 million Allowances. The economic value can range from tonnes of CO2e sequestered per year, 15 to 150 USD per tonne of CO2. equivalent to the emissions of 0.3 million cars • adoption of CA in 9 million ha: 4.4 million tonnes of CO2e sequestered per year, equivalent to the emissions of 0.9 million cars • adoption of CA in 17 million ha: 8.3 million tonnes of CO2e sequestered per year, equivalent to the emissions of 1.7 million cars 49 EX-ACT is a tool developed by FAO and aimed at providing ex-ante estimates of the impact of agriculture and forestry development projects on GHG emissions and carbon sequestration, indicating its effects on the C-balance, an indicator of the mitigation potential of the project. 26 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience 12. Next steps The potential benefits from large scale adoption Financial services of CA are summarized in Table 1 and the risks Access to affordable financing is a key constraint caused by a changing climate should constitute for Ukrainian agricultural enterprises. Any a strong incentive to increase efforts to increase approach to facilitate access to finance should soil fertility and strengthen climate resilience. favour those enterprises which invest in A comprehensive plan should be designed and environmentally friendly approaches such as CA. implemented to achieve such important results. The list below is a set of steps that would be Agricultural insurances charge higher premiums required. to those agro-enterprises which apply CA because this technology is less known. The Verification of preliminary estimates Government should encourage dialogue between The FAO preliminary assessment would benefit research centres and insurance providers so that from a more detailed follow-up investigation the bias against this technology is eliminated; to address areas such as: detailed on-farm productivity, economic and environmental Risk management analyses for technology comparison, assessment It will be necessary to work with the research of agricultural machinery capacity and market, and farm community to improve the quality of evaluation of erosion impact on river systems and information on the estimated potential impact of water bodies’ siltation. climate change on agriculture, differentiating risks and adaptation approaches by agro-ecological Land markets region. Agricultural land markets in Ukraine suffer several weaknesses. This complex issue is a Food security high priority of the Government which the World In order to improve food security, it will be Bank has been supporting for quite some time. necessary to strengthen incentives for adopting It is important to increase the efforts to improve technologies to maintain soil fertility and reduce confidence in long-term use of land so as to the volatility of agricultural production, such as create incentive for farmers to invest in long-term CA with no-till. soil fertility. Implementing the above steps does require Agricultural technology/advisory additional financing. In consideration of the services global benefits that the proposed actions could At the moment, agro-enterprises are excessively generate, there are some sources of international dependent on suppliers for technical assistance. financing which Ukraine could apply for. For To increase the attention paid to soil fertility it is instance, there is available grant funding from the essential to develop a programme of agricultural GEF and from the Adaptation Fund for Ukraine: technology or advisory services which could address soil fertility concerns. 27 • The GEF will start a new funding period in not need to have a detailed budget, detailed July 2014 (called GEF-6), where there are result framework, or economic analysis, funds available for Ukraine to address issues but should focus mostly on justification related to climate change (USD 17.4 million) and rationale. After the project concept has and land degradation (USD 2.9 million). The been accepted, the country can access a GEF does require co-financing, usually at least USD 30 000 grant for preparation. four times that of the GEF grant amount; (iv) Preparation of the full proposal. This is • The Adaptation Fund has a grant of up to quite demanding and often requires much USD 10 million available for Ukraine. correspondence with the Secretariat. The Adaptation Fund can finance adaptation The Adaptation Fund has already funded many investments on a grant basis up to USD 10 million proposals to help the agriculture and food sector per country. The preparation process has some to adapt to climate change. A large number similarities to the GEF project cycle, a known of Climate Smart Agriculture or food security process in Ukraine. The Adaptation Fund has two proposals similar to CA have been financed. This windows: should thus represent an interesting funding option, which may complement GEF funding. (i) the Multilateral Implementation Entities, where international intermediaries such as the United Nations Development Programme, World Bank, the United Nations Environment Programme and others can participate in a tri-partite contract; and (ii) the Regional or National Implementation Entities. This requires a bilateral contract between the Grantee and Grantor, without a multilateral agency as intermediary. A period of at least one year is needed to prepare and receive approval for such a proposal. The following steps are necessary: (i) Nomination of the Adaptation Fund Focal Point at National Level, often the head of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, or similar. (ii) Accreditation of the National Implementing Entry. This is a complex step which requires accrediting several areas including financial management, procurement, project supervision, anti-corruption, and transparency. Countries where a local agency has been accredited: India, Jordan, Uruguay, Argentina, Jamaica, Belize, Senegal, South Africa, Rwanda, Benin. Macedonia should have an advantage here since the Paying Agency has already significant experience under the European Union Accreditation Process. (iii) Preparation of a project concept of about 20 to 30 pages. The project concept does 28 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Annex 1 - Ukrainian soils Dominant soil types in the flat valleys of the Dnepr and its tributaries. Chernozems are associated with Phaeozems, Due to the large size of the country (circa and to a lesser extent with Cambisols, on the 60 million hectares) and the variety of natural Podolskaja and Predneprovskaja uplands of the soil-forming factors (climate, geology, native central part. The southern region is a huge area vegetation, relief etc), Ukraine has a large of homogeneous Chernozems bordered on the diversity of soil types. According to the European south by the Krym peninsula. The depression Soil Atlas (Figure 20), 15 Reference Groups (RGs), between the peninsula and the Chernozems which account for nearly one-half of the RGs of presents a mixture of saline soils. Table 10 the World Reference Base (WRB), are found in provides a tentative equivalent of the FAO WRD the country. base in other soil classifications used in most documents concerning Ukraine. The north-eastern region is covered by Albeluvisols, Phaeozems and Histosols, which In terms of absolute coverage Chernozems are common for mixed coniferous-deciduous and occupy about half of the country, followed by deciduous forests of the cold temperate regions Phaeozems and Albeluvisols, each corresponding of the Russian plain. The north-western part of to about 14 percent of the country. Chernozems Ukraine is dominated by Histosols. Histosols and and similar (Phaeozems and Kastanozems), are Gleysols occupy the swampy depression shared classified as Mollisols in the USDA Soil Taxonomy. with Belarus called Polissya also known as the Chernozems are considered to be amongst the Forest AEZ. The eastern and central parts of the most productive soil types in the world. They are country are covered mainly by Chernozems. characteristic of the long-grass steppe regions, Chernozems combined with Fluvisols are found Table 10: Tentative correspondence of the main soil types in Ukraine Reference group USDA soil Ukrainian Observations of the WRB taxonomy names Albeluvisols Alfisols Peat-boggy soils, Agricultural suitability is limited because of their acidity, low nutrient (aqualfs, cryalfs soddy gleyed levels, and tillage and drainage problems. and udalfs soils suborders) Cambisols Inceptisols Soddy brown Cambisols generally make good agricultural land and are used soils intensively. Chernozems Mollisols Чорноземи or They have deep, high organic matter, nutrient-enriched surface soil Black soils (A horizon), typically between 60-80 cm in depth. This fertile surface horizon results from the long-term addition of organic materials derived from plant roots, and typically have soft, granular, soil structure. Fluvisols Entisols Meadow soils on They correspond to Alluvial plains, river fans, valleys and marshes; (Fluvents and alluvial deposits, many Fluvisols under natural conditions are flooded periodically. Fluvaquents) meadow-swamp Histosols Histosols Peat Soil consisting primarily of organic materials They have very low bulk density and are poorly drained because the organic matter holds water very well. For cultivation, most of them need to be drained and, normally, also limed and fertilized. Gleysols Different orders Light grey and Soil often saturated with groundwater for long periods. Thus, the main with an “aquic” grey Podzolized obstacle to their utilization is the necessity to install a drainage system condition soils, Meadow to lower the groundwater table. soils Phaeozems and Mollisols Meadow- Phaeozems and Kastanozems are much like Chernozems but they are Kastanozems (Udolls and chernozemic leached more intensively. Phaeozems are porous, fertile soils and make Albolls) soils, chesnut excellent farmland. Most are slightly acid or neutral. soils, Solonetzs 29 Figure 20: Distribution of soil types in Ukraine Source: Adapted from Plate 18 of the Soil Atlas of Europe. Figure 21: Distribution of Chernozems in Europe and typical Chernozem profile Source: Soil Atlas of Europe. especially in Eastern Europe, Ukraine and the The first four soil types, corresponding to the Russian Federation. Chernozems, Kastanozems and Phaeozems of the WRB classification (see above) represent The distribution of the soils in Ukraine shows around two thirds of the soil coverage. These soils common patterns with the country’s AEZ contain a high percentage of arable soils, close to (Figure 2). The Forest AEZ corresponds to 90 percent for the different Chernozems types. 19 percent of the territory. The Forest-Steppe zone occupies 34 percent. The Steppe zone Arable soils cover 78.5 percent (about 31 million ha) situated in southern Ukraine occupies about of Ukrainian soils and are mostly Chernozem soils. 40 percent of the territory. See also Table 11 first column) that indicates the coverage of agricultural Main properties of the soils lands per AEZ. Chernozems are typical of the Steppe AEZ (together with Kastanozems in the This section will focus on the most dominant southern part), and of the Forest-Steppe AEZ soil type by area, that also correspond to largest together with Phaeozems. extent of arable lands, that corresponds to the 30 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 11: Ukraine: soil distribution Soils Agricultural lands Arable (based on Ukrainian classification) (thousands ha) (%) Chernozem podzolic 3 418.7 91.6 Chernozem typical 5 779.6 91.8 Chernozem ordinary 10 488.6 88.3 Chernozem southern 3 639.9 88.8 Meadow chernozem and chernozem-meadow 2 038.9 60.0 Light-grey forest, forest grey, dark grey podzolic 4 333.4 80.5 Sod-podzolic, podzolic, grey 3 850.2 74.1 Dark brown, chestnut saline, saline meadow-chestnut, chestnut salt 1 382.9 80.0 Brown (podzolic, podzolic, meadow brownsoil-podzolic gley) 1 110.0 43.9 Brown 48.5 26.2 Meadow and marsh and swamp 975.3 7.9 Alluvial meadow and meadow-swamp 781.9 18.8 Peat from lowland 559.4 14.9 Sod-sandy and sandy-coherently and sand 505.5 24.2 Source: Balyuk, 2013. Figure 22: Ukraine: share of the arable soils 2% 2% 4% 9% Chornozems 68% Meadow Chornozems 11% Gray soils Sod-Podzolic, Podzoic and Gley 4% Dark brown and saline soils Brown soils Others Source: Based on Table 11. Chernozems, Phaeozems and Kastanozems According to Krupskiy and Polupan50 (1979) the (all being grouped under Mollisols in USDA Soil nominal SOM content of Chernozems increases Taxonomy). from 5.2 percent in the Wet Forest-Steppe to 5.7 percent in the Forest-Steppe and 6.2 percent In terms of texture, these soils vary from light in the Steppe, but decreases to 3.4 percent in loam to medium clay. Coarse silt and clay are South Steppe. Fertility of the Chernozem soils thus dominant soil particles, but distributions varies according to their location, following the might differ. Typically texture becomes heavier same pattern, decreasing from Forest-Steppe to from the north to the south: The percentage of Southern Steppe (Table 12). particles (< 0.01 mm) varies from 25 to65 percent from the Wet Forest-Steppe to the South Steppe (Kravchenko et al., 2011). 50 Krupskiy N K, Polupan N I, 1979. Soil Atlas of USSR. USSR, pages 48-101 (cited in Kravchenko et al. 2011: Chin. Geogra. Sci. 21(3) 257-266). 31 Table 12: Agropotential of Chernozem soil for winter wheat Agropotential Zone Soil Arable (%) Natural Optimal q/ha q/ha Chernozem podzolic 30 - 38 40 - 48 8.6 Forest-Steppe Chernozem Typical 32 - 36 38 - 45.2 14.5 Typical Chernozem and Meadow 30 - 36 54 - 64 1.0 Chernozem ordinary 23.2 - 34 31.6 - 40 26.3 Steppe Chernozem Southern 18 - 25.2 22 - 31.2 9.1 Source: Balyuk, 2013. Figure 23: Cation exchange capacity (CEC) in Ukrainian Chernozems 51 Source: Fridland et al., 1981. This behaviour is partly dependent on the CEC management of the soil than its location in the of the soils. CEC is the maximum quantity of different AEZ (Figure 25). total cations that a particular soil is capable of holding, at a given pH value, and which available It is important to stress that soil management for exchange with the soil solution. Thus CEC will have a strong influence on the behaviour correlates with soil fertility. CEC is dependent and dynamics of the different soil properties. on the mineral matrix but also the amount and Management can imply either antagonist or quality of SOM. Soil organic materials raise the synergic patterns among the different soil CEC by increasing the available negative charges. properties. This means it is necessary to fine Consequently, organic matter build-up in soil tune soil management in order to optimize soil usually improves soil fertility. conditions for sustainable productivity. Physical properties of the Chernozem soils are Historically, soil properties have also been also important for their agricultural use. Soil impacted by the different management bulk density is an indirect measure of soil pore operations used in the past (Table 13). space which depends on soil organic matter content and texture. It has been reported that the The major changes observed were the decline in favourable range for plant growth is 0.9-1.3 g/cm 3 SOM (Figure 25) and soil thickness, while water in Ukrainian Chernozems (Fridland et al., 1981). and wind erosion as well as soil compaction are But typically this property will rely more on the also becoming serious (see degradation section below). Kravchenko et al. (2011) also reported a decrease 51 WFSM: Wet Forest-Steppe Mollisols, FSM: Forest-Steppe Mollisols, SM: Steppe Mollisols, SSM: South Steppe in SOM of 22 percent of the original levels in the Mollisols. 32 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 13: Evolution of various inputs to agricultural soils in Ukraine, 1986-2010 Periods of time Management operation 1986-1990 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 Application of chemical fertilizers (kg/ha) 148 16 24 40 Application of organic matter (millions tonnes) 278 52 19 21 Liming of acid soils (thousands ha) 1 548 53 32 36 Source: Balyuk, 2013. Figure 24: Bulk density in Ukrainian Chernozem by tillage systems Source: Kravchenko et al. 2011: Chin. Geogra. Sci. 21(3) 257-266. Figure 25: Evolution of soil organic carbon content in Ukrainian soils for the various AEZ Source: Data reported by Balayev2013.. Forest Steppe zone, 19.5 percent in the Steppe Soil degradation zone and 19 percent in the Forest Zone in Ukraine. Like most cultivated soils around the world, Ukrainian soils suffered and are still exposed to There are strong correlations (even if these different forms of soil degradation. The dominant correlations change according to the soil and forms of degradation are summarized in Table 14. other conditions) between the SOM content and other properties, including fertility. Therefore, The geographical distribution of the different practices that favour the conservation of soil forms of degradation will depend on different resources are urgently needed to guarantee factors such as the climate and the soil type, thus sustainable production. there are zones of degradation as reported for water erosion (Table 15 and Figure 26). 33 Table 14: Type of soil degradation affecting more than 1 percent of total area Share of the degradation level (% of total area) Types of soil degradation low medium strong total Loss of humus and nutrient matter 12 30 1 43 Soil compaction 10 28 1 39 Sealing and soil crust formation 12 25 1 38 Water erosion 3 13 1 17 Acidification 5 9 0 14 Water excess 6 6 2 14 Contamination by radio nuclides 5 6 0.1 11.1 Wind erosion affecting the top soil 1 9 1 11 Pollution by pesticides and other organic contaminants 2 7 0.3 9.3 Contamination with heavy metals 0.5 7 0.5 8 Salinization, alkalization 1 3 0.1 4.1 Gully erosion (ravines formation) 0 1 2 3 Side effects of water erosion (siltation of reservoirs) 1 1 1 3 Source: Morozov, 2007. Table 15: Soil cover degradation in agricultural land by AEZ Area Eroded land Other Acid Salted Zone (water saturation, land land thousand ha % by wind by water both by wind and water marshes, stony) Forest 5 616.6 13.5 4.2 0.9 - 5.4 0.5 3.3 Forest-Steppe 16 854.4 40.6 7.6 11.6 0.1 17.8 2.9 4.0 Steppe 18 993.5 45.8 34.9 19.5 4.9 2.6 8.1 2.8 Total 41 464.5 100 46.7 32.0 5.0 25.8 11.5 10.2 Source: Balayev, 2013. According to a 2007 Country Review from named after O.N. Sokolovskyj, the predominant the World Bank52 “the impact of the Ukrainian reasons causing soil degradation are: agricultural production system on the environment is estimated to cause 35-40 percent • increasing economic pressure on soils for of the total environmental degradation […] productivity; The main environmental problems caused • lower level of conservation areas (nature by agriculture in Ukraine include soil erosion reserves and other protected areas for and degradation, loss of biodiversity, water recreational, health and historical-cultural contamination (both surface and groundwater), purposes); mismanaged agricultural waste, soil • absence of strong adequate state, regional contamination, and inadequate storage of and local programmes; and ” obsolete pesticides. • insufficient level of the legislative protection According to Dr Balyuk, Head of NSC Institute of soils. for Soil Sciences and Agrochemistry Research, 52 “Integrating Environment into Agriculture and Forestry: Progress and Prospects in Eastern Europe and Central Asia”. Volume II - Ukraine. www.worldbank.org/eca/ environmentintegration. 34 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 26: Map of soil degradation in Ukraine Source: Balayev, 2013. Climate change impact Their results suggested that soil organic carbon will be lost under all climate scenarios. However, Smith and his colleagues (Smith et al., 2007) they also showed that optimal management estimated the soil organic carbon status under will be able to reduce this loss of SOC by up to different climate change scenarios from the IPCC 44 percent compared with usual management and the climate model HadCM3 from the Hadley practices. Center. 35 Annex 2 - Erosion of Ukrainian soils Figure 27: Ukraine: soil erosion is visible from satellites Source: Google Earth © (Obtained 17 June 2013). Soil erosion is the most important form of soil at different levels of severity (Figure 28), and an degradation in Ukraine. Erosion can be caused by additional 40 percent is prone to wind and water wind or water. Both forms occur in Ukraine, and erosion. A 1996 study by the State Committee sometimes the combination of both. Erosion has of Land Resources reported that 13.2 million ha associated negative impacts at field and farm level, were exposed to water erosion, and 1.7 million ha such as decrease of soil fertility and decrease of were exposed to wind erosion54. It was estimated crop yields, but also at the landscape scale: that these figures would increase by about 60 000-80 000 ha per year. At this rate erosion • decrease in water quality from nutrient would affect about 14 to 14.5 million ha in 2013. leaching; Erosion is exacerbated by the recent significant • siltation of rivers and reservoirs; and decrease in the application of mineral and organic fertilizers, which has caused a sharp decline in • loss of rural income. soil humus content, as reported in Annex 2. In the past, Ukraine was considered the granary The map above represents the percentage of the former Soviet Union. However, high of arable land affected by erosion, but not agricultural production, mostly in an intensive its severity level. Some authors proposed manner, caused serious erosion. According to an evaluation of the erosion level in terms of FAO53, annual soil losses during that period were intensity. For instance the paper by Belolipskii as much as 600 million tonnes, including 20- 30 million tonnes of humus, and cost the country more than USD 1.6 billion annually. An estimated 40 percent of the country territory is now eroded 54 World Bank. 2007 . Integrating Environment into Agriculture 53 Bogovin A.V. 2006. Country Pasture/Forage Resource and Forestry Progress and Prospects in Eastern Europe and ” FAO. http://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpc/ Profiles: Ukraine. Central Asia. Volume II. Ukraine, Country Review. 22 pp. doc/counprof/ukraine/ukraine.htm. www.worldbank.org/eca/environmentintegration. 36 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 28: Ukraine: erosion map Source: Bulygin, 2006. Figure 29: Ukraine: arable land annual soil loss during the last 30 years Source: Bulygin, 2006. and Bulygin55 divides the Ukrainian steppe to 23.9 million tonnes of humus, 964 thousand into zones according to the potential runoff tonnes of nitrogen, 676 thousand tonnes of manifestation degree, i.e. the potential severity phosphorus and 9.7 million tonnes of potassium. level (see Figure 29). But Bulygin (2006) also recognized that the method used to derive the map in Figure 29, Bulygin (2006) reported that according to might not be appropriate for the Carpathian and data from the Ministry of Agriculture, about Crimean mountains. The yearly soil loss averages 500 million tonnes of soil on average are lost 8-30 tonnes per hectare depending on the from Ukrainian arable land yearly, corresponding region. The same publication also reported that “According to the data obtained from the Institute 55 Belolipskii V.A., Bulygin S.Y. 2009. An Ecological and of Soil Conservation (Lugansk), the shortfall of Hydrological Analysis of Soil- and Water-Protective grain production resulting from soil degradation is Agrolandscapes in Ukraine. Eurasian Soil Science, Vol. 42, No. 6, pp. 682-692. DOI: 10.1134/S1064229309060143. . 8.6 million tonnes” 37 Table 16: Soil properties according to erosion levels and depths pH Clay Clay Nitr. C:N Erosion severity Carbonate Humus Sand Silt N Min N Urease (H2O) (USDA) (FSU) Ener. ratio E0 (none) 7.9 7.7 2.38 7.2 51.4 41.4 56.4 0.17 20.7 13.7 126 7.67 E1 (mild) 8.51 10.0 1.73 11.5 66.8 21.8 34.7 0.13 16.1 9.5 135 6.78 E2 (moderate) 8.66 13.8 1.03 5.6 66.1 28.4 47.9 0.11 10.3 6.2 96 4.72 Mean 8.36 10.5 1.71 8.1 61.4 30.5 46.3 0.14 15.7 9.8 119 6.39 LSD* (Erosion) 0.29 2.7 0.33 4.3 5.8 3.3 2.3 0.02 3.6 2.7 33 1.14 Mean soil properties for different erosion severities and different depths. *LSD = Least significant Difference, it is the minimum difference to have a statistically significant difference between two values. Quantities are in % mg/kg or mg NO3/kg. Table 17: Yields according to various treatments Treatment Yield (tonnes/ha) two year average Barley Wheat Soil without erosion no fertilizer 2.75 4.43 Soil with moderate erosion no fertilizer 2.06 3.38 Soil with moderate erosion plus NPK-fertilizer 2.73 4.31 Source: Kharytonov et al., 2004. Table 18: Characteristics of annual dust storms by AEZ Zone Number of days Duration hours Wind velocity (m/s) 2-4 5-7 8-10 11-13 14-16 17-19 20-22 23-25 26-28 Forest 1.1 2.7 13 24 25 14 11 8 5 - - Forest-Steppe 1.1 2.6 15 26 22 15 9 9 4 - - North and Central Steppe 2.9 8.5 8 15 21 12 17 14 10 2 1 South Steppe 5.3 17.5 6 14 20 14 17 17 9 2 1 Source: Dolgilevich, 1997. Considering a soil bulk density of 1 tonne per m3, 30-50 percent lower in a moderately eroded plot a loss of 10 tonnes of soil per ha corresponds compared with a control plot without erosion. to a loss of 1 mm of the top soil layer, which mostly contains C-rich soil organic matter. The authors also showed that even adding a Taking a 5 percent content of soil carbon, a complete and efficient fertilizer (NPK 60 kg per loss of 10 tonnes of soil corresponds to a loss ha in the form of nitrophoska [N17-P17-K17] a of 0.5 tonnes of C per ha, an important figure synthetic polymer-based fertilizer) the yield is compared with the existing potential soil C still slightly below the non-eroded soil without sequestration levels (See Annex 7). fertilizer. A study from Kharytonov et al.56 in the Dnepropetrovsk district showed that eroded soils have significantly lower humus and clay contents, and higher pH and carbonates values (Table 16). They also reported that soil macro and micro- nutrients (Manganese, Zinc, and Copper) were 56 Kharytonov M., Bagorka M., Gibson P .T. 2004. Erosion effects in the central steppe Chernozem soils of Ukraine. I. Soil properties. Agricultura, 3, 12-18. 38 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 19: Effects of tillage levels on soil losses (Kilograms/m2/year; Average 2011-2012) Ploughing 6 Mini-till 4.5 No-till 3 Source: In-field personal communication (SCAI of Donetsk). May, 2013. Wind erosion Addressing erosion Dolgilevich57 studied the extent and severity of Land resource management is the best cost- wind erosion in Ukraine using information about effective way to address erosion. Conservation dust storms over a forty year period including agriculture practices are often cited by the number, duration and the wind velocity farmers and soil scientists as having several of storms at all meteorological stations of the positive outcomes for reducing risks from Ukraine. Its analysis showed that wind erosion drought. These include: reducing soil erosion; takes place in all AEZ. The climatic parameters of enhancing moisture retention; and depending wind erosion were determined as follows: The on the soil texture, minimizing soil compaction. mean number of days with dust storms reaches Conservation agriculture is also credited with 3-5 days in the Steppe zone and 1 day per year limiting damage from runoff and erosion during in the Forest zone. The duration of dust storms flooding. Some producers are also enhancing the is 8-17 and 3 hours per year. Wind velocity establishment of shelterbelts mostly to address during dust storms reaches 21 and 15 m.s -1 wind erosion. Shelterbelts also provide protection respectively (Table 18). The author also reported from heat and wind for livestock. Another way to that Chernozems are most susceptible to wind address wind erosion is to maintain the soil as erosion and are severely degraded. moist as possible. One solution in a country with important snow precipitation is to cut stubble at different heights to trap snow on field surfaces and so enhance spring moisture levels in the soil. The stubble also helps maintain the snow in place during the windy periods. 57 Dolgilevich M.J. 1997. Extent and Severity of Wind Erosion in the Ukraine. Proceeding of the workshop “Wind Erosion: An International Symposium/Workshop” . http://www.weru. ksu.edu/symposium/proceedings/dolgilev.pdf. 39 Annex 3 - Land, cropping structure, and yields Figure 30: Agricultural land structure in Ukraine, million ha By use By ownership 59 0.9 0.3 2% 1% 1.0 2.4 5.0 State Arable lands 2% 6% 12% enterprises 5.5 Pastures Private 13% Hayland enterprises Total area: Perennial Individuls 41.5 planting 15.8 19.7 million ha Other Fallow 38% 48% landusers abandon land 32.5 78% Source: MAFP . , “Panorama of Ukraine Agrarian Sector 2012” Table 20: Agricultural lands by ownership in 2012 Type of ownership   Total Enterprises Rural households Others Units 47 652 5 100 000 - - Agricultural land, million ha 20.7 15.8 5.0 41.5 Arable land, million ha 19.4 11.6 1.5 32.5 Source: MAFP, Panorama of Ukraine Agrarian Sector 2012. Role of agriculture in the national land (41.5 million ha). Over 78 percent of this economy (32.5 million ha) is arable land (see Figure 30). With an agricultural GDP of 111.7 billion UAH58 As shown by Table 20, 36.5 million ha (88 percent in 2012, agriculture contributed 7.93 percent to of total agricultural land) are owned by the Ukrainian GDP. Sixty seven percent of this enterprises (state and private, agricultural and was from crop production: the main agricultural farm enterprises) and rural households. By the sub-sector. Livestock production contributed the end of 2012, about 48 000 enterprises owned remaining 33 percent. 50 percent of all agricultural land and 60 percent of all Ukrainian arable land. Land distribution by use, enterprise, region and agroclimatic zone According to the most recent data provided by MAPFU, at the end of 2012, 69 percent of 59 According to the Ukrainian State Statistics Service: An the entire Ukrainian territory was agricultural agricultural enterprise (state or private) is defined as in-dependent business entities which has legal person’s right and carries out productive activity on Agriculture. The structure of private agricultural enterprises includes private farms also. Private farm is a form of private business of citizens with legal person’s right, who has expressed the wish to produce commodity production, to process and sell it with purpose to gain a profit. Citizens carry out their activity 58 UAH (Ukrainian Hiryvnia); equal to about USD 13.7 billion. on land lots, which were placed at their disposal for farming. 40 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 31: Crop land structure 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2000 50,2 8,4 15,4 26 2012 55,4 28,4 9 7,2 Cereals, total Industrial crops Fodder crops Potato and veg. Source: MAFP, Panorama of Ukraine Agrarian Sector 2012. Figure 32: Historical trends of grains, 1990-2011 2011/05 18 leguminous and others 16 spring - rice 14 Corn spring - buckwheat + 112% 12 spring - millet million ha 10 Spring barley spring - maize for grain - 36% 8 spring - oats Winter barley + 150% spring - barley 6 spring - wheat 4 Winter wheat + 5% winter - barley 2 winter - rye 0 winter - wheat 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 Source: UkrStat. The regional distribution of all the land owned areas under spring barley decreased significantly by enterprises and rural households in 2011 is while farmers increased the areas under winter provided below. The five regions with the largest barley and corn by 150 percent and 112 percent areas of arable land are Dnipropetrovsk, Odessa, respectively. Zaporizhia, Kharkiv and Kirovograd provinces. All five regions are situated in the Steppe AEZ. The Despite the stable crop area, grain output in Steppe zone covers 19 million ha of Ukrainian Ukraine has been unstable due to high yield agricultural land, the Forest-Steppe zone variability. In the recent years, grain production 16.9 million ha and the Forest zone 5.6 million ha. ranged from slightly less than 40 million tonnes in 2010 to over 55 million tonnes in 2011. In 2012, Ukraine reported a harvest of 46.2 million tonnes Crop production of grain crops. In the last five years (2008-12), According to MAPFU, in 2012 the total crop average production in the Steppe region has been area in Ukraine was 27.8 million ha. As shown 10 million tonnes of wheat and 3 million tonnes by Figure 31, over 55 percent was dedicated to of corn; and 8 million tonnes of wheat and cereal60 production. 9.5 million tonnes in the Forest-Steppe region. The total area under cereals has remained stable After the stagnation in the early 1990s, the since 2007 at around 15 million ha. From 2005 to expansion of the oilseeds area (see Figure 35) 2011, the crop structure changed significantly. If has been particularly impressive, especially the the acreage of winter wheat remained stable, the sunflower seed area. Farmers decreased the area under sugar beets because of the loss of sugar export markets. 60 Wheat, barley, oats, corn, rye, minor cereals and pulses. 41 Figure 33: Production of main grain crops, 1990-2011 60 50 40 million tonnes 30 20 10 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 Other grain and leguminous crops Wheat Corn Source: UkrStat. Figure 34: Production of industrial crops 8 flax fibre 7 +320% Rape rape 6 +159% Soya soya 5 sunflower million ha 4 sugar beet (factory) +27% 3 Sunflower 2 20 1 11 /0 Sugar beet 5 -18% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Source: UkrStat. Figure 35: Production of main oilseed crops, 1990-2011 14 12 10 million tonnes 8 6 4 2 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 Sunflower Soya Rapeseed Source: UkrStat. 42 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 36: Profitability levels of main crops in Ukraine in 2012 46% 23% 22% 20% 12% Wheat Corn Average crop Soya Sunflower production Grain crops - Industrial crops Profitability level of main crops Source: UkrStat. According to MAPFU61, agronomic Forest-Steppe zones; corn dominates the Forest- sustainability of oilseed production in Ukraine Steppe zone while barley is mainly sown in the requires sunflower area to decrease to Forest and northern Forest-Steppe zones. 3-3.5 million ha and be in line with crop rotation recommendations provided by Resolution N Yields 164 of 11 February 2010 (see below); areas Potential and actual yields of crops are very under soya and rape seed can be considered as different by region (corn in particular). The most alternative sequences. productive provinces are concentrated in the central part of Ukraine – the Forest-Steppe Compared with 2005, the output of main zone. Wheat yields are rather similar across the industrial crops more than doubled in 2011. In country with Vinnytsia, Cherkasy, Khmenytskyi 2012 Ukraine produced 8.4 million tonnes of and Poltava provinces performing slightly better sunflower seed. In the last five years (2008-12), than others. Corn yields are lower in the eastern the average sunflower seed production in the Steppe zone (Zaporizhia, Donetsk and Luhanska Steppe region was 5 million tonnes, while that of provinces) and are particularly high in the central the Forest-Steppe region was 2 million tonnes. Forest-Steppe zone. Sunflower performs well in the central east Forest-Steppe zone. This result was a result of increasing cropped area and higher yields. In all cases, farmers’ perception Yield volatility of the market appears to have led to their choice Significant regional differences also exist in the of a continued expansion of sunflower output. volatility of crop yields. As visible from Table 21, This behaviour can be explained by the fact lower than average wheat yield volatility was that industrial crops (sunflower in particular) are characterized by higher levels of profitability (see observed in Forest-Steppe and Forest zones official statistics in Figure 36). and in Mikolaiv province. The Steppe zone is usually characterized by high volatility, particularly Crop production: regional distribution Kharkivska province. Corn yields were also more Crop production varies from region to region volatile in another Steppe zone Luhanska province. reflecting economic and agroclimatic conditions Sunflower yields were highly volatile in western of the area. For instance, milling quality wheat regions of Ukraine but were more stable in central is mainly produced in the Steppe and southern and south-eastern regions of the country. High regional yield volatility has not been mitigated 61 Ukrainian MAFP, Panorama of Ukraine Agrarian Sector 2012. at national level. In the period from 2000 to 43 Table 21: Ukraine: volatility of yield of wheat and corn by region, tonnes per ha, 2008-2011 Wheat Corn Agro-climatic zone Province Min Max Av StDev/Av Min Max Av StDev/Av Luhanska 2.4 3.8 2.8 25% 1.7 3.9 2.5 40% Crimea 2.1 3.3 2.6 21% 7.7 8.8 8.1 6% Hersonska 2.4 3.5 2.9 19% 5.2 6 5.5 6% Dnipropetrovska 2.9 3.8 3.2 14% 3 4.5 3.5 19% Steppe Zaporizka 2.6 3.5 3 13% 2.6 3.1 2.9 8% Kirovogradska 3 3.9 3.4 12% 4.7 6.6 5.3 16% Donetsk 2.9 3.6 3.2 11% 2.1 3.8 2.9 23% Odesska 2.6 3.3 3 11% 2.7 4.1 3.5 19% Mikolaïvska 2.9 3.1 3 4% 2.9 4.7 3.9 20% Harkivska 2.1 4.6 3.4 31% 2.6 5.7 3.9 33% Kyivska 2.5 4 3.2 23% 5.3 8 6.3 20% Sumy 2.2 3.9 3.1 23% 3.5 6.4 5 24% Poltavska 2.6 4.3 3.5 20% 4.4 7.9 6 24% Forest-Steppe Ternopilska 2.5 3.8 3.3 17% 5.3 6.3 5.6 9% Hmelnickiy 2.9 4.1 3.5 15% 5.3 6.3 5.9 7% Vinnitska 3.3 4.5 4 13% 5.5 7.5 6.3 14% Lvivska 2.5 3.5 3.1 13% 5.2 6.4 5.8 10% Cherkaska 3.5 4.7 4.2 13% 5.3 9.1 6.8 25% Chernigivska 2.2 3.3 2.9 20% 4 6.5 5 21% Zhytomyrska 2.5 3.4 3.1 13% 5.1 7.2 6.4 15% Forest Rivnenska 2.9 3.7 3.2 10% 4.7 5.7 5 9% Volinskiy 2.6 3.2 2.9 10% 6 7.1 6.3 8% Chernivetska 2.7 3.8 3.3 15% 4.8 5.8 5.2 9% Mountains Zakarpatska 2.1 3.1 2.8 16% 4.5 4.8 4.7 2% Ivano-Frankivska 2.5 3.7 3.1 16% 4.6 5.8 5 11% Source: Own calculations based on 2011 UkrStat data. 2012, corn yields in Ukraine fluctuated from 3 to of corn and 17 million tonnes of wheat per year. 6.4 tonnes/Ha with an average yield of 4.2 tonnes/ In the same period, the minimum and maximum ha and wheat yields from 1.5 to 3.7 tonnes/ha with annual production levels of corn varied from an average yield of 2.8 tonnes/ha. 28 percent below average to 54 percent above it and wheat production varied from 48 percent In order to quantitatively assess the volatility of below average to 30 percent above it. yields we calculated their Standard Deviation. The charts below show the volatility of yields: Ukraine Crop calendar and cropping patterns is among the top three countries for high yield Winter wheat, corn, sunflower and spring barley volatility. (main crops in Ukraine) are planted and harvested according to the calendar below. The persisting high volatility in yields of the main cereal crops in Ukraine negatively impacts national Winter wheat production is mostly concentrated output levels. During the period from 2000 to 2012 in the central and south-central Ukraine, with the Ukraine produced on average 9.7 million tonnes hard red winter wheat type the most cultivated. 44 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 37: World: volatility of wheat and corn yields (Deviation from average 1987-2012) Wheat yield Corn yield Wheat yield (average=1, 1987/2013) Corn yield (average=1, 1987/2013) 1,8 1,8 1,6 1,6 1,4 1,4 1,2 1,2 1 1 0,8 0,8 0,6 0,6 0,4 0,4 0,2 0,2 0 0 01 02 03 03 04 4 05 5 06 6 07 7 08 8 09 9 10 0 11 1 12 2 3 01 02 03 04 04 05 5 06 6 07 7 08 8 09 9 10 0 11 1 12 2 3 20 200 20 200 20 200 20 200 20 00 20 200 20 201 20 201 20 201 01 20 200 20 200 20 00 20 200 20 200 20 201 20 201 20 201 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 / / / / / / / / 00 01 02 / / / / / / / 00 01 02 03 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Argentina Australia Canada Argentina Australia Canada European Union Former Kazakhstan European Union Former Kazakhstan Russian Soviet Union United States Russian Soviet Union United States Federation Ukraine Federation Ukraine France* Turkey France* Turkey Source: Own calculations based on PSD USDA.. Figure 38: Ukraine: calendar of main crops Source: USDA. Sunflower, the principal Ukraine oilseed crop, specialists see crop rotation as the best way - or has become one of the most profitable crops the only way - to control disease in sunflower due to a combination of high price, a relatively fields); (ii) depletion of soil fertility, for the deep low production cost. Unfortunately, this results rooting system that extracts higher amounts in frequent violations of crop rotation schemes of nutrients from the soil than other crops in recommended by agricultural officials. the rotation; (iii) depletion of soil moisture; the deeper sunflower taproot utilizes water that can The official recommended frequency of sunflower otherwise constitute a reserve, considering the in crop rotation is once every seven years frequent occurrence of droughts. According to recommendations62 sunflower should occupy the because of phytosanitary conditions and the last place in the rotation prior to the fallow year, in nutrient balance of soils. The one in seven years order to restock soil moisture. frequency is recommended for the prevention of: (i) soil-borne fungal diseases (with most farms facing financial constraints that limit their access 62 Resolution of February 11, 2010 N 164 On approval of optimal ratio of crops in crop rotations in different natural to fungicides and disease-resistant hybrids, and agricultural zones. 45 Table 22: Crop rotation recommendations Structure of sown areas (in percentage) Natural and agricultural region Potatoes, Industrial crops Forage crops Fallow grains and legumes vegetables, melons Incl.: Incl.: All All All All rape sunflower grasses Polissya (Forest) 35-80 3-25 0,5-4 0.5 8-25 20-60 5-20 Forest-Steppe 25-95 5-30 3-5 5-9 3-5 10-75 10-50 Northern Steppe 45-80 10-30 10 10 Up to 20 10-60 10-16 5-14 Southern Steppe including irrigated 40-82 5-35 5-10 12-15 Up to 20 Up to 60 Up to 25 18-20 Pre-Carpathians 25-60 5-10 5-7 8-20 25-60 10-40 Allowable frequencies of growing crops in a same field are: • winter rye and barley, spring barley, oats, buckwheat - not less than one year; • winter wheat, potatoes, millet - not less than two years; • corn in the rotation or temporarily withdrawn from the rotation field - two/three years; • perennial legume grasses, legumes (except lupine), sugar and fodder beets, winter rape and spring - not less than three years; • flax - not less than five years; • lupine, cabbage - not less than six years; • sunflower - not less than seven years; • medicinal plants (depending on the biological properties) - one to ten years. Source: Resolution of February 11, 2010 N 164 on approval of optimal ratio of crops in crop rotations in different natural and agricultural zones. Barley production mostly consist of spring- • winter wheat > 2. corn (or barley) > 3. sown barley (approximately 90 percent of total sunflower (or winter wheat) > 4. soybean (or barley production), The area sown with spring mustard, or sorghum); barley typically fluctuates in response to the • pulses (e.g. chick pea) > 2. winter wheat > 3. level of winter wheat that is sown in the autumn sunflower > 4. sorghum (commercial crops and the amount of wheat winterkill; spring rotation); reseeding of damaged or destroyed winter crop • alfalfa > 2. alfalfa > 3. alfalfa > 4.Corn silage fields is common. Malting barley production > 5. winter wheat or pulses/grass in dry year has significantly increased as a result of higher (fodder crops rotation). demand from the brewing industry and the import demand of high-quality planting seed from the Despite official recommendations provided by Czech Republic, Slovakia, Germany, and France. the “Resolution of February 11, 2010 N 164 On approval of optimal ratio of crops in crop rotations The sown area of maize has progressively in different natural and agricultural zones” (see increased, becoming the third most important Table 22), establishing a clear frequency of crops grain crop. It is mainly planted in eastern and useful to preserve soil fertility and to better southern Ukraine, excluding some extreme manage soil-borne diseases, the frequency of southern provinces with insufficient rainfall to crops such as sunflower or a few grain crops in support its cultivation. the same field has increased. After the liberalization of Ukrainian agriculture, farmers cropping patterns have changed and are now more market-oriented, influenced by the profitability levels characteristic of single crops. Based on information collected during our field visit, among the most common crop rotation schemes in the Steppe zone are the following: 46 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Annex 4 - Climate change in Ukraine Main climatic features of Ukraine Figure 39 depicts the agrometeorological zones in Ukraine. Ukraine is situated on the southwest of the Eastern European plain. Almost all of Ukraine is within the temperate zone with a moderately Climate change trends continental climate. The southern coastal region The above indications on productive moisture of Crimea has sub-tropical features. The climate are very relevant when looked at from a climate is generally favourable for most of the important change perspective. According to a study of crops and in some areas of the country two climate change impact on the forest ecosystem65, harvests are possible. a temperature increase is forecasted for all seasons of the year on the premise of doubled Total annual solar radiation varies from 96 to 125 CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. Thus, kcal/cm2. The average annual air temperature according to scenarios developed on the basis increases from 5-6ºC in the northeast up to 9-11ºC of the Canadian Climate Centre Model (CCCM) in the southwest. Absolute values of temperature: and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies minimum -34 to -37ºC of frost, maximum +36 to (GISS) model simulations, the air temperature +38ºC above zero.63 On average, 300-700 mm will increase most significantly in winter, and of precipitation falls annually on flat areas. The according to the GFDL model and United distribution of rainfall in Ukraine shows a decrease Kingdom Meteorological Office model, it will from north and north-west to south and south-east. increase in the spring. According to the last two scenarios, the warming in Ukraine will increase The three rain zones are64: from south to north and will be the greatest • zone of sufficient rainfall, where precipitation in the north, in the region of the Forest AEZ is most important. This zone is the Ukrainian during the winter and spring seasons. Under Carpathian Mountains, as well as the West all the scenarios, the amount of precipitation and Southwest of Ukraine. In the Ukrainian will increase, and during certain seasons Carpathians rainfall exceeds 1 000 mm per this increase could exceed the current level year, but in parts of the mountains it reaches by 20 percent. However, all studies predict 1 500 mm; increased precipitation in all areas of the country. In addition, these are not necessarily tied in a • zone of unstable rainfall. This is the south- positively correlated manner with the crop cycles. eastern and the central part of Ukraine with Other studies66 have noted that a temperature annual rainfall between 500-600 mm. In this increase of only 1°C would result in a 160 km zone dry years are likely, particularly in the shift in the latitudinal borders of the natural centre; and • zone of the insufficient rainfall with high probability of dry years and occurrences 65 Igor Fedorovich Buksha. 2010: Study of climate change impact on forest ecosystems, and the development of of droughts. This includes the eastern and adaptation strategies in forestry, in: Forests and Climate southern part of the country. Here precipitation Change in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Working Paper n. 8, FAO. 2010. The climate change forecast for the conditions is less than 400 - 500 mm per year, but near of Ukraine was made using four models: CCCM (sensitivity to doubled atmospheric CO2 concentration = 3.5°C), GFDL the sea coast even less than 400 mm. (sensitivity to doubled atmospheric CO2 concentration = 4.0°C), GISS (sensitivity to doubled atmospheric CO2concentration = 4.2°C), and UKMO (sensitivity to 63 Data from the Ukrainian Agrometereological Centre (www. doubled atmospheric CO2 concentration = 3.5°C). meteo.gov.ua). 66 Didukh, Y. 2009. Ecological Aspects of Global Climate 64 Ukrainian Committee - International Commission on Change: Reasons, Consequences, Actions. pp. 34-44, in: Irrigation and Drainage; “Irrigation management transfer in Report of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, European countries of transition” , March 2005. 2009, no. 2. 47 Figure 39: Agrometeorological map of Ukraine Source: Adapted from Ukrainian Hydrometerological Centre. Figure 40: Deviation from norm: average annual air temperature by AEZ (0C), 1989-2012 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 -0,5 -1 Norm = Steppe - 9.5 Forest Steppe - 7.8 Polissya - 7.6 -1,5 Steppe Forest Steppe Forest Source: Adamenko 2011. zones; and that the temperature increase caused 1989 average annual temperature in most years by warming would result in increased moisture exceeded the norm in the Polissya/Forest and evaporation from the soil surface. In the Forest- Forest-Steppe zones. These AEZ “get warmer” Steppe and Steppe zones, climate change is significantly faster than the Steppe zone. The expected to intensify the decomposition of average country level and the mean temperature humus and this will result in less humus content deviation from the norm for various AEZ can be in soils and in decreased soil fertility. seen in Figure 1 and Figure 40. According to T.I. Adamenko, Head of The effect of higher temperatures on the Agrometeorology Department, Ukrainian reduced productive moisture appears to be more Hydrometeorological Centre (UHMC), since significant in the soils of the dry Steppe zone, 48 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 41: Soil moisture in AEZs, 1961-2011 Supply of Productive Moisture (mm) in a Meter Soil Layer as of May 28 under Winter Wheat by Continuous Observation (Bashtanka, Southern Steppe) 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1961 1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 Source: Adamenko 2011. which would probably be more detrimental on temperature reduction; (v) the droughts of crop performances in this AEZ in the future. severe-to-exceptional and exceptional severity during the growing season normally affect 25- Scientific papers unanimously stress a 60 percent (up to 80 percent of the major crop considerable increase in drought areas, their area) and 5-10 percent (up to 20 percent) of the frequency, intensity, duration and impact. entire country and the latest is leading to up to Such tendencies are generally agreed to have 40 percent of losses in Ukrainian grain production taken place in the past 30 years (1980-2010) every three to five years. of intensive global warming and especially the last 11 years (2001-2011)67. Adamenko68 Crop yield dynamics has also looked at drought monitoring through satellite-based drought detection techniques69. The study71 referred to above, analyzed yield Regional analysis indicate: (i) the drought area dynamics of the main cereal crops in major in Ukraine has not experienced any trend after provinces of all regions of Ukraine during 14 years 2000, although the last 50 years country average from 1996 to 200972. Both winter (Wheat; Barley; annual temperature increased by 1.45°C (twice Rye) and spring crops (Wheat; Barley; Oats) were the global increase ); (ii) winter temperature 70 examined. As a general trend, cereals show a increase in Ukraine is higher than the summer positive yield trend in all AEZ. This increase can one; (iii) total annual precipitation increased by be attributed to a number of factors, including 40 mm despite drought intensification due to a improved rates of mineral fertilizer application, warmer climate; (iv) strong increase in winter better crop protection and plant genetics. temperature is leading to a 10 percent reduction However, it is clear that yields of all crops and in of the winterkill area; however, reduced snow all regions vary greatly due to weather conditions. depth contributes to an increased vulnerability As can be seen in Figure 42, yield fluctuations of winter crops during the period of sharp air in the Dnipropetrovsk area of the Steppe region are strongly marked, and during the years characterized by drought conditions (2003/2007) 67 T.I. Adamenko, et al: Global and Regional Drought Dynamics in the Climate Warming Era, in International Journal of there is a drastic reduction of yields. Remote Sensing, 2011. 68 Op. cit. in note n. 6. 69 Using data obtained from the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) on NOAA polar orbiting satellites. In addition, Vegetation health method is used to estimate the entire spectrum of vegetation condition or 71 See note n. 6. health from AVHRR-based Vegetation Health (VH) indices. 72 Trend lines were calculated using harmonic weights, yield 70 The latest available (4th) IPCC report stated that the average deviations from trend lines, trend productivity dynamics Earth surface temperature in the past 100 years increased and assessment of climate variability of yields across 0.74° (Solomon et al, 2007). territories of Ukraine. 49 Figure 42: Crop yield dynamics (Dnipropetrovsk, Steppe), 1996-2009 Winter wheat Winter barley Winter rye Spring wheat Spring barley Spring oats Source: Adamenko 2011. 50 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 23: Ukraine: yield coefficients of climate variability, 1996-2009 Soil climatic zone, Province Winter wheat Winter rye Winter barley Spring wheat Spring barley Oats Polissya Volinskiy 0.12 0.14 0.23 0.12 0.12 0.15 Rivnenska 0.14 0.14 0.19 0.13 0.16 0.20 Zhytomyrska 0.17 0.13 0.31 0.24 0.15 0.15 Chernigivska 0.19 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.16 0.14 Forest-Steppe Lvivska 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.13 0.10 Ternopilska 0.18 0.19 0.26 0.15 0.14 0.15 Hmelnickiy 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.14 Vinnitska 0.22 0.17 0.20 0.21 0.17 0.15 Kyivska 0.21 0.13 0.20 0.11 0.17 0.14 Sumy 0.25 0.17 0.35 0.17 0.18 0.19 Cherkaska 0.26 0.19 0.24 0.19 0.21 0.15 Poltavska 0.31 0.17 0.29 0.21 0.21 0.16 Harkivska 0.30 0.22 0.35 0.21 0.27 0.21 Steppe Kirovogradska 0.32 0.24 0.30 0.36 0.31 0.26 Dnipropetrovska 0.34 0.26 0.31 0.28 0.30 0.31 Donetsk 0.28 0.21 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.22 Luhanska 0.32 0.26 0.30 0.36 0.28 0.25 Odesska 0.32 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.28 Mikolaïvska 0.33 0.27 0.36 0.36 0.32 0.31 Zaporizka 0.27 0.22 0.31 0.33 0.36 0.27 Hersonska 0.29 0.25 0.32 0.40 0.33 0.31 Crimea 0.12 0.17 0.15 0.26 0.24 0.21 Zakarpattya and Prykarpattya Zakarpatska 0.34 0.13 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.12 Ivano-Frankivska 0.15 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.08 Chernivetska 0.22 0.20 0.22 0.22 0.14 0.10 Across Ukraine 0.22 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.13 Note: 0.00-0.20 climate stable yields; 0.21-0.30 moderately stable yields; >0.30 unstable yields Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. 51 Figure 43: Ukraine: forecast of dates of spring season higher temperatures by zones (>5 0C) anticipation, 2030-2040 Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. Figure 44: Ukraine: forecast of autumn season higher temperatures by zone and date (>5 0C) delay, 2030-2040 Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. As shown in the Table 23, crops in the Steppe region are those most subjected to climate variations. Weather variations can be described by the weather coefficient of yield variability Cp, which is calculated as follows73: 73 Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic , Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. sectors of Ukraine” 52 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 45: Ukraine: forecast of temperatures (>10 0C) duration by zone, 2030-2040 Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011.. Figure 46: Ukraine: forecast of precipitation with temperatures (>5 0C) by zone, mm, 2030-2040 Figure 47: Ukraine: forecast of precipitation with temperatures (>10 0C) by zone, mm, 2030-2040 Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. 53 Figure 48: Ukraine: evaporation scenarios by zone, mm, 2030-2040 Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. Forecasts 2030-2040 With respect to precipitation, for the period with the temperatures above 5 and 10 °C, it will be Regarding climate change scenarios in higher than that of 1991 to 2005. Comparison of 2030-2040, Adamenko et al74, 75confirm the this previous period with deviations by 2030-2040 findings of Bukhsa76 (except that the latter has shown that for all seasons the amount will reports a precipitation decrease of 180 mm in increase, except in autumn. some localities in the south of the country). The Adamenko study also discusses about Total evaporation will increase. The lowest anticipation by 30-33 days of spring air increase will be in western Polissya – by 10 mm temperatures above 50° Cin Forest, Forest- (but in between the two previous observation Steppe and northern Steppe AEZs; and by 39-41 periods [1961-1990 and 1990-2005] it had already days in the southern Steppe. increased by 22 mm). The highest evaporation will occur in eastern Polissya - up to 100 mm, Autumn temperature transition in the years 2030- in Western Forest-Steppe and in Southern 2040 will come later and will be delayed until the Steppe up to 80-90 mm. In Ukraine evaporation 13th-15th of December in the South, and until the will range from 615 mm in eastern Polissya to 20th-25th of November in Forest/Polissya region 470 mm in Southern Steppe. (a 23 day delay in Polissya and a 30 day delay in southern Steppe). Crop scenarios The changes in duration of the period with the The forecast for the 2030-2040 crop climate temperatures above 10 °C are more substantial change scenario is based on a GFDL-30% (in periods that are relevant to active vegetation model77. Simulations provide the region-specific of agricultural crops): the period increases to agroclimatic indicators for the winter wheat 215 days in central Polissya; and to 250 days in Southern Steppe. 77 The Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) is a laboratory in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). GFDL ’s accomplishments include the development of the first climate models to study global warming, the first comprehensive ocean prediction codes, 74 Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P ., et al. and the first dynamical models with significant skill in “Assessment of climate change impact on economic hurricane track and intensity predictions. Much current , Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. sectors of Ukraine” research within the laboratory is focused around the 75 Using Geophysics Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) model development of Earth System Models for assessment of at 30% increase of GHG emissions. natural and human-induced climate change. A 30 percent 76 See note n. 3. model is one that assumes GHG emissions at that level. 54 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience crop (compared with long-term data) shown spring cereals in Ukraine. The observations show in Table 24. To summarize, the scenario is a positive soil moisture trend for the entire period characterized by higher temperatures at all stages of observation but with the trend levelling off in and in particular much warmer at wintering the last two decades. Five global climate models stage (mitigating winterkill effects), and slightly were used which all show a descending trend increased precipitation at sowing stage but starting from 2000, but differing one from the substantially reduced rainfall during wintering. other: from a rough sketch (GFDL) to a decisively marked Center for Climate System Research As a result, Table 25 shows the main climate model (CCSR) lowering trend of soil moisture. change adaptation phenological behaviour for winter wheat. Compared with long-term data, it is Finally, a study done by UHMC, the Odessa State foreseen that the following conditions will occur: Environmental University and the Moscow Main • delayed sowing dates (by 20-25 days); Aviation Meteorological Centre, acknowledged • anticipated vegetation recovery after winter that extreme conditions in precipitation have dormancy period; been observed in Ukraine during the last 30 • crop ripeness is proportionally delayed; and years and that the number of abnormally dry • overall plant cycle length is substantially and hot years, dry summers and winters have unchanged. increased in some regions. Accordingly, the study determines spatiotemporal features of droughts In terms of crop yield performance, the growth in Ukraine during the last 60 years by using trend reported for the 1996-2009 period appears to the Standardized Precipitation Index showing be confirmed in the 2030-2040 scenario simulation. that there is an increasing trend in droughts in It would appear that mitigation of winterkill due to the southern regions during the whole 60 year higher winter temperatures, improved moisture period. This trend is more pronounced starting supply at vegetation recovery stages, and from the second half of the 1990s. diminished moisture deficiency conditions are able to produce increased yields. Surprisingly, the best It is worth confirming that climatic simulations performances would be in the Steppe area. differ widely depending on the global model being used. The 4th IPPC report clearly depicts Unfortunately, the scenarios analyzed in the such wide variations as can be noted from the referred study are silent on crop yield dynamics projection below. as well as on precipitation and moisture supply dynamics. However, since all climate change studies tend to agree that variability of climatic conditions and frequency of extreme events will also increase, it may be assumed that – in a best case scenario - a similar pattern to that examined for the 1996-2009 period may also occur in the future (see Figures 40-42). It is worth mentioning the findings of a previous study78, which observed the longest data set of soil moisture available in the world: 45 years (1958-2002) of gravimetrically observed plant available soil moisture data for the top 1 m of soil, observed every 10 days during April-October for 141 stations from fields with either winter or 78 Alan Robock, Mingquan Mu, Konstantin Vinnikov, Iryna V. Trofimova, and Tatyjana I. Adamenko: Forty Five Years of Observed Soil Moisture in the Ukraine: No Summer Desiccation (Yet); 2004, in Geophysical Research Letters. 55 Table 24: Agroclimatic conditions for winter wheat cultivation (Numerator – by scenario GFDL model 30 %, Denominator – average long-term data) Sowing stage Wintering stage AEZ, province average temperature average air sum of sum of sub-zero sum of of the most cold temperature, °C precipitation, mm temperatures, °C precipitation, mm decade, °C Polissya 10.8 97 0 0.4 122 Zhytomyrska 8.8 87 445 -6.8 211 Forest-steppe 11.7 82 0 0.4 151 Cherkaska 9.2 71 440 -6.5 198 Northern Steppe 8.4 84 0 1.5 123 Dnipropetrovska 9.2 66 415 -6.4 200 Southern Steppe 7.1 93 0 3.5 53 Hersonska 8.6 65 195 -4.0 182 Prykarpattya 9.7 83 0 1.8 95 Ivano-Frankivska 9.0 92 335 -5.9 190 Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. Table 25: Development stages of winter wheat in autumn (Numerator – by scenario GFDL-30 % model, Denominator – average long-term data) Recovery Duration AEZ, province Sowing Idle vegetation Wax/ ripeness vegetation spring-summer Zhytomyrska 28.09 30.11 1.03 9.06 101 Polissya 6.09 7.11 31.03 13.07 105 Cherkaska 29.09 30.11 28.02 6.06 99 Forest-steppe 9.09 8.11 29.03 7.07 101 Dnipropetrovska 13.10 13.12 25.02 1.06 97 Northern Steppe 11.09 12.11 27.03 2.07 98 Hersonska 1.11 5.01 20.02 23.05 93 Southern Steppe 19.09 25.11 21.03 26.06 98 Prykarpattya 23.10 22.12 23.02 13.06 111 Ivano-Frankivska 9.09 11.11 29.03 20.07 114 Source: Stepanenko S.M., Polovy A.M., Shkolny E.P , Ekolohiya, Odessa 2011. ., et al. “Assessment of climate change impact on economic sectors of Ukraine” 56 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 26: Agroclimatic conditions of winter wheat in spring-summer (Numerator – by scenario GEDL-30 % model, Denominator – average long-term data) average air temperature average soil moisture for period, °C supply (0-100 cm), mm Sum of solar Sum Moisture rain in AEZ, province radiation evaporation deficiency mm Vegetation Earing-wax Vegetation Earing-wax kcal/ cm2 mm mm recovery -ripeness recovery -ripeness Polissya 196 11.1 17.4 238 166 18.8 268 90 Zhytomyrska 260 13.2 17.1 207 166 21.8 312 64 Forest-steppe 172 11.2 18.3 165 96 20.0 236 34 Cherkaska 189 12.9 18.1 146 123 21.2 252 52 Northern Steppe 151 13.0 18.5 132 77 18.3 217 35 Dnipropetrovska 147 13.3 18.7 111 90 20.5 220 101 Southern Steppe 111 11.5 17.1 122 64 17.3 173 81 Hersonska 114 13.3 19.4 87 51 21.6 192 175 Prykarpattya 346 11.5 16.2 232 209 20.9 318 191 Ivano-Frankivska 444 12.3 17.1 251 236 24.1 428 212 Figure 49: Ukraine: soil moisture compared with 1971-2000 mean Source: Forty-five years of observed soil moisture in the Ukraine. Robok et al. (incl. Adamenko), in GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 32, LXXXXX, 2005. Figure 50: SPI for southern Ukraine for 1950-2009 and trends for some periods Source: Valeriy Khokhlov, Natalia Yermolenko, and Andrey Ivanov: Spatiotemporal features of droughts in Ukraine under climate change, presented during a Workshop on the Development of an Experimental Global Drought Information System, 11-13 April 2012, Frascati (Rm) - Italy. 57 Figure 51: Regional climate projections Source: IPPC, 4th Report. 58 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Annex 5 - Resource-saving technologies in Ukraine Definitions of land preparation Zero/no-till is not specifically defined in Ukraine technologies in Ukraine as it has not been studied much. The FAO definition is adopted. Scientists and stakeholders describe the following technologies as those in use79 in The SSAcI has made an attempt to provide an Ukraine: indication on area/soil type technology suitability across the country. This is based on presumed • combined tillage soil type behaviour taking account of the known • mini/minimal tillage soil physical features, but however, with little • zero tillage empirical evidence. Combined tillage is defined as applying a plough The prevailing concerns of scientists in Ukraine or a chisel, and at times both in succession, over CA/no-till technology include the following: turning (plough) or not (chisel) the topsoil. Soil-related (hard, sandy, stony, over moisturized, Depending on region and cultivated agricultural gleyish); climate-related (cold moist spring delaying crop, the technology differentiates by depth, nitrification processes and causing nitrogen number of operations, and set of tools. It allows deficit); technical (excess of weeds, rodents, and deep fertilization, mechanical weed control, and pests/diseases); organizational (need to invest incorporation of rain water before harrowing. It in specialized machinery and related technical increases loss of SOM, it facilitates compaction, assistance, financial constraints and overuse/ and it is a high-fuel consuming technology. management of herbicides and agrochemicals). It is understood – as discussed with the scientists Minimum tillage is when direct seeding and a in Ukraine – that these concerns can be all reduced number of pre-sowing/weed removing addressed through experiential learning on soil- tillage operations are also practiced. The and farm-specific cases. As a result, Table 27 technology in Ukraine entails a number of tillage would need to be revised. operations each season with wide (shoe type) blades or with knife tillers that cut the roots of Trials80 made on yield81 comparisons show weeds. This disturbs the soil, although less than contradictory though not disappointing results, traditional ploughing. It has a beneficial effect on comparing traditional (and combined), minimum- erosion and reduces land preparation costs. till and no-till technologies. Admittedly, it must Table 27: Ukraine: technology suitability by AEZ, million ha Minimum tillage No-till Forest 2 - (Turf-podzolic; Turf and meadow) Forest Steppe (black soils typical and podzolic; 3.4 3.5 Dark grey; Grey and light grey) Steppe 3.5 2 (Black soils ordinary) Source: SSAI, O.N. Sokolovsky. 80 Presentation made by Professor S.A. Balyuk during Round Table discussions in Kyiv on 23 May, 2013. 81 According to SSAcI data, the fertility agropotential of all 79 Presentation by SSAI Sokolvsky researcher S.A. Balyuk Ukrainian soils in the different agro-ecologies of the country during FAO-WB Round Table discussions in Kyiv on 23 May, is certainly high for winter wheat: 31.2-39.2 q/ha (forest); 2013. 38-64 q/ha (forest steppe); and 22-40q/ha (steppe). 59 Table 28: Ukraine: prevailing land/seed bed preparation technologies, million ha of cropped land, 1990-2009 Technology 1990 2000 2005 2009 Percent of total Traditional/ploughing 29.5 19.5 10.0 4.9 18 Mini/minimum tillage 2.0 7.5 17.0 21.9 80 No-till 0 0.2 0.5 0.70 2 Total 31.5 27.2 27.5 27.5 100 Source: Authors’ elaboration; and Agrosoyuz, 2013.82 be said that the no-till technology is applied • resource-saving technologies have picked improperly. In fact, depending on which crop up steadily since independence and with a is included in the rotation (e.g. beetroot) even strong impetus during the last 15 years; the no-till soil is ploughed for that crop. This one • mini-till is currently the most popular land operation cancels all the gains the technology preparation technology in use; was re-establishing on that given soil. In terms • traditional land preparation through ploughing of soil humus content (SOM) - calculated while has strongly decreased with an apparent comparing the three technologies on soils which trend towards being definitely substituted; had a high SOM starting point (above 4 percent) – gains were marginal but evident at the first • no-till was introduced in the late nineties and ten (0-10 cm) and first 20 centimetres of the has progressed slowly; and soil. Otherwise at  -20 cm and at 20-30 cm, very • overall cultivated area has decreased slight decreases (0.02 and 0.14 percent) were substantially since pre-independence levels recorded. In this regard, an interesting trial which because of a combination of two main is being conducted by SSAcI on the chlorophyll reasons: decreased access to financing content of crop leaves for the three technologies needed for agricultural inputs and machinery shows that no-till plants are apparently better purchases and exclusion of marginally able to produce it (Table 5). profitable land from production. All such trials would however need to be repeated The trends observed above are similar to those extensively and at different locations and in many other FSU countries. Most of these conditions – in full respect of each technology’s countries in their move towards a post-FSU correct protocol – and be documented to have a agricultural modernization have also had to face formal scientific recognition. challenging issues such as growing erosion, decreasing soil fertility, and soil moisture Prevailing situation in Ukraine impoverishment as a result of an inadequate land resource management and an increased Official statistics do not mention the actual frequency of drought events. Depending on the area-coverage of different land preparation agro-ecological and global economic situation of technologies in the country. However, interesting each country, these challenges have had diverse assessments are made by practitioners and mainly impact and level of priority. by agricultural machinery suppliers who have their own countrywide networks and observatories. Accordingly, the evolution of land/seed bed In Ukraine, given the prevalence of its richer black preparation technologies in use in Ukraine is Chernozem soils (which by nature have higher estimated to be as shown in Table 28, which SOM content and have more resilient chemical- shows that: physical behaviours), soil scientists and farmers appear to have prioritized two such challenges - fighting against erosion and improving farm profitability by reducing fuel consumption. 82 Personal communication and presentation made by Probably for these reasons, farmers have given representatives of the JSC AgroSoyuz in Dnepropetrovsk on March 13, 2013. precedence to the easier - in terms of adaptation 60 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 29: Ukraine: technology comparison effect on soil losses (in kg/m2; average 2011-2012) Ploughing 6 Mini-till 4.5 No-till 3 Source: In-field personal communication (SCAI of Donetsk). May, 2013. Table 30: Ukraine: technology comparison effect on fuel consumption (litres/ha) Ploughing 90-120 Mini-till 60-80 No-till 25-40 Source: Farm managers; Researchers. 2013. requirements - minimum tillage as compared • In three other provinces including Sumy, with the more complex conservation agriculture/ through the Global Agricultural Management no-till technology. The MAPFU which provides Enterprises project (included in the AP general guidance, has issued its own strategy Programme) giving technical assistance to paper to facilitate the adoption of resource-saving 30-40 000 hectares. techniques and technologies in Ukraine83. Erosion affects, with diverse intensities, It is worth noting that the introduction of no- over 40 percent of arable land (see Annex 3). till methods in the late 1990s was triggered by Indeed experimental trials have shown that the technical assistance programmes, such as the mitigating effect of “reduced tillage” technologies Agribusiness Partnership (AP) Program and the over erosion is immediately considerable. Food Systems Restructuring Program (FSRP), supported by the United States Agency for Moreover, CA/no-till while it contributes to the International Aid84 in partnership with private gradual regeneration of the inherent soil structure agribusiness companies. features, also improves its “anti”- erosion impact which overtime may go beyond the levels The conversion of a number of farms to a no-till indicated above. or a minimum tillage system was promoted. From the cost of production savings standpoint, • In Donetsk province in 1996, the FSRP and particularly in terms of fuel consumption introduced reduced tillage practices in both research trials as well as farm management 420 private farms covering more than experiences in Ukraine all show and agree that 300 000 hectares, and a year after the ploughing is by far the highest fuel consuming programme was expanded to other 460 technology. This is greatly reduced when moving to farms for a land coverage of around minimum tillage, and is further reduced with no-till. 420 000 hectares. The above indications suggest that CA/no-till • In Dnepropetrovsk province, through the technology allows farmers to better preserve soil AP programme; technical assistance for the fertility and reduce production costs compared introduction of reduced tillage practices was with minimum tillage. This, together with a implemented for 250 farms with a total of number of other beneficial effects (on crop yields, 200 000 hectares of land. carbon sequestration, increase in SOM, and improved soil moisture content, all discussed 83 Agriculture State programme till 2015; September 19, 2007 , elsewhere in this study) should justify a gradual N. 1158 ((http://minagro.gov.ua/apk?nid=2976). but more decisive move towards adoption of this 84 Agribusiness Partnership Program- “The impact of CNFA (Citizens Network for Foreign Affairs) partnership in Ukraine technology in Ukraine. The reasons for the rather , December 31, 1997 (http://pdf.usaid. agricultural sector “ gov/pdf_docs/PNACG280.pdf. 61 sluggish adoption of CA/no-till in the country can how the technology can be best adapted for the be explained with the following arguments. different agro-ecological conditions and farms. As previously discussed, the main areas of FAO definition of CA/no-till interest from the farmers’ point of view (erosion and fuel consumption), and least for the short According to FAO (http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/), CA to medium-term, have been addressed by is an approach to managing agro-ecosystems for the minimum tillage technology to an extent improved and sustained productivity, increased which is considered quite adequate at current profits and food security while preserving scientific/technical knowledge and investment/ and enhancing the resource base and the organizational capacity levels. environment. CA is characterized by three linked principles, namely: Farmers in Ukraine do not have sufficient evidence from the existing research and • continuous minimum mechanical soil knowledge generation base on both the disturbance; incremental and more sustainable benefits that • permanent organic soil cover; and can accrue by adopting CA on their farms, as well • diversification of crop species grown in as on the appropriate measures that need to be sequences and/or associations. used at different soil-climate-cropping pattern. The experience and evidence accumulated by the CA principles are universally applicable to all few big farms that have adopted CA technology agricultural landscapes and land uses with locally are too sparse and are not always comparable; adapted practices. CA enhances biodiversity and at times they are not consistent or data has not natural biological processes above and below been collected with scientific rigor; and, in simple the ground surface. Soil interventions such as words, are thus not convincing to the broader mechanical soil disturbance are reduced to an audience. In turn, scientists have insufficient absolute minimum or avoided, and external means, outdated fundamental information (e.g. inputs such as agrochemicals and plant nutrients on the actual status of their soils), and have had of mineral or organic origin are applied optimally little to no exposure to international research and in ways and quantities that do not interfere networks working in this technology area. with, or disrupt, the biological processes. Indeed CA/no-till is a long-term undertaking CA facilitates good agronomy, such as which is able to show its sustained benefits timely operations, and improves overall land only overtime. The more these incremental husbandry for rainfed and irrigated production. benefits are marginal as compared with a rather Complemented by other known good practices, acceptable starting point (soil quality, SOM, including the use of good quality seeds, and crop yields, etc.), the more the investors will be integrated pest, nutrient, weed and water sceptical in appreciating the actual advantages. management, CA is a base for sustainable agricultural production intensification. It opens Nevertheless, the interactions that took place increased options for integration of production during this study with the most concerned sectors, such as crop-livestock integration stakeholders - the farmers - confirm that there and the integration of trees and pastures into is a growing professional interest in CA/no-till. agricultural landscapes. Ukrainian farmers do not appear to be entrenched in a non-critical, agnostic attitude and are eager There are the three principles of conservation to learn more about what the technology can agriculture. actually provide in terms of benefits to them. Similarly with Ukrainian researchers in soil and other related sciences. They are ready and willing to invest more time and effort to understand 62 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Direct planting of crop seeds, involving • consequential reduction of runoff and erosion; growing crops without mechanical seedbed • soil regeneration is higher than soil preparation and with minimal soil disturbance degradation; since the harvest of the previous crop • mitigation of temperature variations on and in The term direct seeding is understood in CA the soil; and systems as synonymous with no-till farming, zero tillage, no-tillage, direct drilling, etc. Planting refers • better conditions for the development of roots to the precise placing of large seeds (maize and and seedling growth. beans for example); whereas seeding usually refers Crop diversity to a continuous flow of seed as in the case of small cereals (e.g. wheat and barley). The equipment The rotation of crops is not only necessary to penetrates the soil cover, opens a seeding slot and offer a diverse “diet” to the soil micro-organisms, places the seed into that slot. The size of the seed but as they root at different soil depths, they slot and the associated movement of soil are to are capable of exploring different soil layers for be kept to the absolute minimum possible. Ideally nutrients. Nutrients that have leached to deeper the seed slot is completely covered by mulch after layers and that are no longer available for the seeding and no loose soil should be visible on the commercial crop can be “recycled” by the crops surface. Land preparation for seeding or planting in rotation. This way the rotation crops function under no-tillage involves slashing or rolling the as biological pumps. Furthermore, a diversity weeds, previous crop residues or cover crops; or of crops in rotation leads to a diverse soil flora spraying herbicides for weed control, and seeding and fauna, as the roots excrete different organic directly through the mulch. Crop residues are substances that attract different types of bacteria retained either completely or in a suitable amount and fungi, which in turn, play an important role to guarantee complete soil cover, and fertilizer and in the transformation of these substances into other inputs are either spread on the soil surface or plant available nutrients. Crop rotation also has an applied during seeding. important phytosanitary function as it prevents the carryover of crop-specific pests and diseases Permanent soil cover, especially by crop from one crop to the next via crop residues. The residues and cover crops effects of crop rotation include: A permanent soil cover is important to protect the soil against the negative effects of exposure • higher diversity in plant production and thus in to rain and sun; to provide the micro and macro human and livestock nutrition; organisms in the soil with a constant supply of • reduction and reduced risk of pest and weed “food”; and alter the microclimate in the soil infestations; for optimal growth and development of soil • greater distribution of channels or bio-pores organisms, including plant roots. The effects of a created by diverse roots (various forms, sizes permanent soil cover include: and depths); • improved infiltration and retention of soil • better distribution of water and nutrients moisture resulting in less severe, less through the soil profile; prolonged crop water stress and increased • exploration for nutrients and water of diverse availability of plant nutrients; strata of the soil profile by roots of many • source of food and habitat for diverse soil different plant species resulting in a greater life: creation of channels for air and water, use of the available nutrients and water; biological tillage and substrate for biological • increased nitrogen fixation through certain activity through the recycling of organic plant-soil biota symbionts and improved matter and plant nutrients; balance of N/P/K from both organic and • increased humus formation; mineral sources; and • reduction of impact of rain drops on soil • increased humus formation. surface resulting in reduced crusting and surface sealing; 63 Annex 6 - Carbon sequestration and climate change mitigation The adoption of conservation agriculture has an change in soil bulk density85 that has occurred. impact in terms of GHG balance. Emissions are A relatively simple way of achieving this is to reduced at field level due to lower (almost zero) sample soils on an “equivalent mass basis” topsoil disturbance by tillage and the maintenance (sometimes termed “equivalent depth”) rather of mulch. When properly managed, this process than equal depths. This is important when there can sequester carbon from the atmosphere is likely to have been a change in soil bulk density storing it in soils. Moreover, the reduced (either over time or between treatments) and mechanized operations also imply a decrease in when, as is usually the case, the entire profile fossil fuel (mostly diesel fuel) consumption. is not sampled. The principle is that an equal mass of organic matter-free mineral soil should Sequestration rates under CA in be sampled between the treatments or times Ukraine ” This has a direct implication being compared. Calculation of soil carbon (C) sequestration when analyzing the performance of conservation rates agriculture in terms of C sequestration. For Two approaches are possible (diachronic and instance, considering the impact of the tillage synchronic) to calculate soil C sequestration rates systems observed in Ukraine and reported in of a new practice in comparison to a conventional Annex 1. Ukrainian soils, when the change in arable one. The diachronic approach consists of practice is from conventional tillage to zero tillage, measuring in years (t), on the same field plot, soil it implies a small increase in bulk density of about C stocks between time 0 (installation of the new 5 percent: if the conventionally tilled soil was system) and time x. The major disadvantage of sampled to a given depth (which should be slightly the diachronic approach is that one must wait and greater than cultivation depth), it is necessary to measure over long periods of time before being sample the soil after a period of zero tillage to able to evaluate the quantity of C sequestered. slightly shallower depth in order to compare equal Therefore, estimates are generally based on a masses of mineral soil and correctly quantify any synchronic approach. The synchronic approach change in soil C stock. consists of comparing the C stock of a field plot, at a given time tn, (corresponding to the Another determinant point concerns the temporal sequestering practice tested during × years) with variability. For instance, Kapshtyk et al.86 showed that of a field (control or conventional practices) important C dynamics in Chernozems over a four- under traditional management which represents month period (see Figure 52). The period of the t0 state or the reference point. The major year of the soil sampling might be determinant uncertainty of this approach remains the absolute in the calculation of the sequestration rates. If comparability of the field plots which must be the objective is to compare different systems, similar in terms of other soil properties (fertility, sampling should be done at the same moment. physical variable, hydrological properties, etc.). Based on the curve below, the differences between conventional and no-till will be more Sampling methods are vital to derive sound soil C evident in April or November. sequestration rates in a scientific way. As Powlson et al (2011) highlighted “When quantifying a change 85 Soil bulk density is an indirect measure of soil pore space in soil C stock, by comparing measurements taken which depends on soil organic matter content and texture. 86 Kapshtyk M.V., Shikula M.K. L.R. Petrenko. 2000; at two times or by comparing two treatments or “Conservation non-plough systems of crop production in land uses, it is essential to take account of any . In: Soil Ukraine with increased reproduction of soil fertility” Quality, Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Security in Central and Eastern Europe NATO Science Series Volume 69, 2000, pp 267-276. 64 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Figure 52: Seasonal cycles of humus in 0-10 cm layer of typical Chernozem, according to cropping system applied for more than five years 6,1 6,05 6 5,82 5,83 5,9 5,74 5,8 5,71 5,7 percent 5,56 5,63 5,6 5,63 5,47 5,5 5,57 5,53 5,4 5,3 5,2 5.1 April June August November Long-term grassland Minimum non-plow tillage Plow tillage Source: Kapshtyk et al., 2000.. Figure 53: Influence of 10-year tillage on soil organic carbon (0-100 cm soil layer) Different letters indicate significant differences (p-level of 5%) between tillage treatments: CT = Conventional tillage; DMT = deep minimum tillage; RMT = Reduced minimum tillage; RH = Rotary harrow (minimum soil disturbance in the top 6 cm). Source: Kravchenko et al., 2012. Table 31: Soil layer carbon content by technology Tillage systems Soil layer (cm) Conventional (CT) Minimal (MT) Zero (NT) Carbon content (%) 0-10 4.37 4.54 4.52 10-20 4.35 4.34 4.33 20-30 4.26 4.14 4.12 30-40 4.36 4.44 4.43 40-50 4.33 4.34 4.32 Source: Agrosoyuz JSC. 65 As a result, it is not straightforward to estimate and K2O) with an important annual application of sequestration rates based only on soil C cattle manure at a rate of 12 tonnes per hectare. content. The section below reviews the available The authors added in their conclusion that information for Ukraine and the requirements synthetic and organic fertilizations had a greater to provide estimates of sequestration rates impact on SOM concentration than the tillage associated with the adoption of conservation practices. In other words, the tillage effect was agriculture in Ukraine. masked in this experiment. Available data in Ukraine As there is a scarcity of published scientific Very few scientific publications (indicated in papers in English, unpublished data can also be this annex) are available in English or with an an important source of information. Agrosoyuz extended abstract in English on the evaluation JSC reported the following information in terms of the performance of reduced-tillage systems of C contents. compared with conventional tillage systems. Few, if any, discuss comparisons with true CA/ Unfortunately, soil bulk measurements are not no-till technology. Moreover, they deal nearly reported. This does not permit a direct calculation exclusively with physical properties (bulk density) of C stocks, and then sequestration rates. It is or chemical properties linked with fertility known that soil management influences the parameters such as N and P content, Cation bulk density (see Annex). In order to derive an Exchange Capacity. Some papers presented estimate, the soil bulk densities reported by the results focused only on a particular fraction (or same authors were corrected. As a result on an component) of the carbon pools: e.g. Kravchenko equivalent soil mass, soil carbon stocks were et al. and Kapshtyk et al. . These papers do 87 88 respectively 255.7, 257.3 and 256.4 tonnes C/ not consent the calculation of the soil carbon ha. Thus the benefit of no-till compared with sequestration rate. conventional tillage seems modest and inferior to 1 tonne C/ha over the test period. Only one scientific paper reports C stocks in a typical Chernozem soil of Ukraine under different Other authors proposed to test the impact of long-term tillage systems . 89 different management practices in terms of fertilization and irrigation. Saljnikov et al.90 presented Even if the systems with the reduced tillage detailed information on the soil carbon dynamics intensity have the highest C stock (441.2 t C/ha), for 3 case studies in Ukraine (Kharkov, Uman and the authors concluded that there is no significant Kherson). In brief, the authors reported that: difference after ten years, compared with CT (438.3 t C/ha). But it is important to highlight that • when comparing mineral and organic the different treatments received NPK fertilizers fertilizers (Uman): “The content of soil organic (respectively 75, 68 and 68 kg/ha of N, P2O5 carbon was not increased after thirty six years application of mineral fertilizer in most of the 87 Kravchenko Y.S., Zhang X., Liu X, Song C., Cruse R.M. 2011. treatments, compared with the control, while Mollisols properties and changes in Ukraine and China. Chin. Geogra. Science, 21, 3, 257-266. DOI: 10.1007/ application of high rates of manure (O) alone s11769-011-0467-z. maintained the higher accumulation of soil 88 Kapshtyk M.V., Shikula M.K. L.R. Petrenko, 2000 “Conservation non-plough systems of crop production in organic carbon”; and Ukraine with increased reproduction of soil fertility” . In: Soil Quality, Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Security in Central and Eastern Europe NATO Science Series Volume 69, 2000, pp 267-276. http://link.springer.com/ book/10.1007/978-94-011-4181-9/page/1. Kapshtyk M.V., Shikula M.K., Balajev A., Kravchenko Y., Bilyanovska T. 2002; 90 Saljnikov E., Cakmak D. and Rahimgalieva S. 2013. Soil “The ways for an extended reproduction of soil fertility Organic Matter Stability as Affected by Land Management in Chernozems of Ukraine” . In: Book of abstract, 2002 in Steppe Ecosystems. “Soil Processes and Current Trends Bangkok Thailand 17th World Congress of Soil Science. in Quality Assessment” , book edited by Maria C. Hernandez (www.iuss.org). Soriano, ISBN 978-953-51-1029-3, Published: February 89 Kravchenko, Y., Rogovska, N., Petrenko, L., Zhang, X., Song, 27 , 2013 under CC BY 3.0 license. 433 pages, Publisher: C. and Chen, Y. 2012. “Quality and dynamics of soil organic InTech, Published: February 27 , 2013 under CC BY 3.0 matter in a typical Chernozem of Ukraine under different license DOI: 10.5772/45835 (http://www.intechopen.com/ long-term tillage systems” . In: Can. J. Soil Sci. 92: 429-438. download/pdf/43223). 66 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience • when studying the impact of fertilization and potential on a global scale, according to major irrigation practices (Kherson): there were no climate zone. In this simplified classification, statistical differences for the top 0-20 cm. the Ukraine climate corresponds to “Cool However, treatment with fertilization plus Dry” (southern part of the country) and “Cool irrigation gave the best results. Moist” zones (most of the northern part of the country). The corresponding carbon sequestration In conclusion, because the soil carbon content rates proposed for the no-tillage and residues of Chernozem is high, up to several hundreds of management category is 0.15 tonnes CO2-eq /ha tonnes of carbon per hectare in the top meter, it /yr-1 for the Cool Dry zone and 0.51 tonnes CO2- is really difficult to detect, in few years, variations eq /ha /yr-1 for the Cool-Moist zone. These values of hundreds of kg of carbon. The calculation of correspond to sequestration rates of 0.04 tonnes soil C sequestration rates in Ukraine requires C/ha /yr-1 and 0.14 tonnes C/ha /yr-1. detailed and high quality determination of soil organic carbon plus soil bulk density. It is clear that on an annual per hectare basis, the level is small and certainly hard to detect, In 2007, the IPCC published global estimates even in well conducted short- to medium-term of soil carbon sequestration rates (net change experiments. This is made harder considering considering all direct GHG, expressed as CO2- the annual variability (Figure 52). However, eq) of broad sustainable land management when applied to large areas, the numbers categories, namely agronomy, nutrient would be significant (see EX-ACT appraisal management, tillage/residue management, below, Table 32). Moreover, the scenario of water management, and agroforestry. Briefly, adoption of conservation agriculture should be the “agronomy” category corresponds to compared with the business as usual scenario. practices that may increase yields and thus The construction of a baseline scenario is often generate higher residues. Examples of such required in analyses and prospective studies practices, reported by Smith et al.91, include using that aim at comparing different possible future improved crop varieties, extending crop rotations, situations. Thus, the dynamics of the soil and rotations with legume crops. Nutrient organic content under a CA hypothesis must be management corresponds to the application of compared with a baseline reference. Smith et al. fertilizer, manure, and biosolids, either to improve reported that decrease of soil organic carbon will efficiency (adjusting application rate, improving continue if no changes in management practices timing, location, etc.) or reduce the potential occur. Smith et al. reported an average loss losses (slow release fertilizer form or nitrification observed for arable soils of 21 percent (with a inhibitors). Tillage/residue management regards range of 17-32 percent) based on statistical data adoption of practices with less tillage intensity for different Ukrainian regions, between 1881 and ranging from minimum tillage to no-tillage and 2000. For a more recent period (1961 to 2000), with or without residue retention in the field. there is still a loss of 11 percent on average. In Water management brings together enhanced absolute terms, the current decrease in Ukrainian irrigation measures that can lead to an increase croplands is estimated in the range of 0.35- in the productivity (and hence of the residues). 0.55 tonnes C per hectare. This is a result of the Agroforestry encompasses a wide range of decrease in organic fertilization (see Table 13) and practices where woody perennials are integrated suboptimal land management practices. within agricultural crops. Due to the scarcity of data, only simplified categories were used in compiling mean estimates of C sequestration 91 Smith J., Smith P ., Wattenbach M., Gottschalk P., Romanenkov V.A., Shevtsova L.K., Sirotenko O.D., Rukhovich D.O., Koroleva P .V., Romanenko I.A., Lisovo N.V. 2007. Projected changes in the organic carbon stocks of cropland mineral soils for Europe, the Russian Federation and the Ukraine, 1990-2070. Global Change Biology, 13, 342-356. 67 Figure 54: Machinery and field operations No-till systems compared with traditional ploughing Source: Martial Bernoux.. Table 32: EXACT Appraisal Description Function Method Set of linked Microsoft Excel Measure of the benefits of an Computing of the C-balance by sheets for the insertion of data on investment project/programme comparing a situation without and soil, climate and land use of the through ex-ante estimates on GHG with project. considered project area. emissions & CO2 Fossil fuel consumption compute the C-balance by comparing scenarios: The adoption of CA would reduce farming “without project” (i.e. the “Business As Usual” operations (Figure 54) and thus fuel consumption. . The main output or “Baseline”) and “with project” According to values collected during field visits, of the tool consists of the C-balance resulting fuel consumptions range from 90-100 litres per from the difference between these alternative ha for conventionally ploughed systems, to 60- scenarios. 80 litres per ha for minimum tillage systems and 25-40 litres per ha for no-till systems. EX-ACT has been developed using mostly the Guidelines for National Greenhouse EX-ACT is a tool developed by FAO aimed at Gas Inventories92 complemented with other providing ex-ante estimates of the impact of methodologies and a review of default agriculture and forestry development projects coefficients for mitigation option as a base. Most on GHG emissions and carbon sequestration. It indicates a project’s effects on the C-balance, an indicator of the mitigation potential of the project. EX-ACT was primarily developed to support appraisal in the context of ex-ante project formulation and it is capable of covering the range of projects relevant for the land use, land use change and the forestry sector. It can 92 2006 IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 68 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience calculations in EX-ACT use a Tier 1 approach93 2000, whereas the baseline (the without project as default values are proposed for each of the option in EX-ACT) was set to a linear tendency. five pools defined by the IPCC guidelines and These dynamics were used in EX-ACT to the United Nations Framework Convention calculate the benefit of adoption of no-tillage for on Climate Change (UNFCCC): above-ground the past period (2010 till 2013) and estimates for biomass, below-ground biomass, soil, deadwood the future. and litter. It must be highlighted that EX-ACT also allows users to incorporate specific coefficients In terms of soil carbon sequestration, the linear from project area, when available, therefore also trend corresponds to a total sink of 34.1 million working at Tier 2 level. EX-ACT measures carbon tonnes of CO2 sequestered (for the period 2000- stocks and stock changes per unit of land, as 2039). This includes 3.3 million tonnes already well as Methane (CH4) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O) sequestered in the period 2000-2013. Thus emissions expressing its results in tonnes of without incentive for further no-till adoption, the Carbon Dioxide equivalent per hectare (tCO2e. benefit forecast is 30.8 tonnes of additional CO2. ha-1) and in tonnes of Carbon Dioxide equivalent per year (tCO2e.year-1). The Scenario of adoption corresponds to a total sequestration of 211.3 tonnes CO2, from which EX-ACT consists of a set of Microsoft Excel 208 for the period 2013-2039. When comparing sheets in which project designers insert to the baseline, it means an additional benefice information on dominant soil types and climatic of 176.4 tonnes CO2 in relation to the baseline. conditions of a project area, together with basic These results depend heavily on the assumption data on land use, land use change and land made for the climatic moisture regime. Table 33 management practices foreseen under the shows the results obtained by EX-ACT when project’s activities as compared with a business using the dry moisture regime. As the Steppe as usual scenario (Bernoux et al. 2010). region is characterized both by moist and dry moisture regimes, it can be estimated that the Basic assumptions for the ex-ante appraisal overall benefice of the adoption of no-till systems in Ukraine, which was performed to illustrate will fall in the range 52.1-176.4 tonnes CO2 with a countrywide balance of GHG emissions after the best estimate close to 115 tonnes CO2 eq. introduction of CA, were the following: The adoption of no-till will also result in reduced • location is Eastern Europe; fuel consumption and consequent permanent emission reduction. Considering that a • dominate climate is Cool Temperate Moist; conventional system uses 95 litres per hectare in and average and a no-till system uses 32.5 litres, the • dominant soil type is HAC Soils (which overall emission reduction can reach 45.7 tonnes correspond to High activity clay soil, e.g. of CO2 equivalent compared with the baseline fertile soils, of the IPCC classification). scenario. Figure 55 shows the scenario of adoption and the baseline used in the assessment. The scenario of adoption corresponds roughly to a logistic function (also named “S-curve”) starting from 93 IPCC Guidelines provide three methodological tiers varying in complexity and uncertainty level: Tier 1, simple first order approach which uses data from global datasets, simplified assumptions, IPCC default parameters (large uncertainty); Tier 2, a more accurate approach, using more disaggregated activity data, country specific parameter values (smaller uncertainty); Tier 3, which makes reference to higher order methods, detailed modelling and/or inventory measurement systems driven by data at higher resolution and direct measurements (much lower uncertainty). 69 Figure 55: CA adoption 18 16 14 12 ha of CA 10 8 6 4 2 0 2005 2009 2013 Short term Medium term Long term Table 33: Sensitivity of results to moisture regime “Dry” and “Moist” moisture regimes Corresponding gross benefit Scenario and period (tonnes CO2-eq) Dry regime Moist regime Baseline - linear trend (2000-2013) 1.0 3.3 Baseline - linear trend (2013-2039) 9.0 30.8 Baseline - linear trend (2000-2039) 10.0 34.9 Scenario of adoption (2000-2013) 1.0 3.3 Scenario of adoption (2013-2039) 61.1 208.0 Scenario of adoption (2000-2039) 62.1 211.3 70 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Annex 7 - Financial and economic analysis Table 34: Ukraine: potential annual benefits from adopting CA Benefits for 3 Benefits for Benefits for Level Type Per 1 ha million ha 9 million ha 17 million ha (short-term) (medium-term) (long-term) Annual farm Incremental net USD 136 USD 0.41 billion USD 1.23 billion USD 2.31 billion benefits income Off-farm additional Annual national output value and USD 123 USD 0.37 billion USD 1.11 billion USD 2.10 billion benefits additional soil fertility value Total national benefits USD 259 USD 0.8 billion USD 2.3 billion USD 4.4 billion % share of agricultural GDP 6 18 34 Improved food security (additional 16.1 million 30.4 million people fed during 2.4 people 5.4 million people people people drought years, non- Annual global monetary benefit) benefits 1.5 million 4.4 million 8.3 million 0.5 tonnes CO2 (equivalent to the (equivalent to (equivalent to Reduced emission per year emissions of 0.3 the emissions of the emission of million cars) 0.9 million cars) 1.7 million cars) Investments in Total farm equipment investment and herbicides, USD 200 USD 0.6 billion USD 1.8 billion USD 3.4 billion requirements plus research and extension Source: Team estimates. The potential cumulative benefits deriving from The model was constructed to simulate a large-scale adoption of CA in Ukraine can be investments profitability for three different divided into the following three main types: crop production/land preparation technologies: farm/enterprise, national, and global level. The conventional, minimum tillage, and CA/no-till. summary of the main economic and financial Assuming a 10 year project life and based on gains from CA introduction at each level is the cost-benefit analysis for each technology the provided in Table 1 (repeated as Table 34). model calculates – for each technology – specific and incremental95 net incomes. The model simulates actual and incremental cash flows Farm/enterprise level and calculates the main investment efficiency As a result of the adoption of CA/no-till indicators such as investment and credit needs, technology, agriculture enterprises are expected and NPV. to obtain more stable yields, decrease the use of inputs and reduce land degradation. These factors The following crop rotation was considered: can lead to a significant improvement of farm winter wheat, corn, sunflower and soybeans. economic and financial efficiency. In this respect, The investment was calculated for each we built a model to illustrate the efficiency of technology assuming a start-up business with all investment in conservation agriculture using a other conditions being the same. 4 000 hectare farm94 as an example. 94 A 4 000 hectare farm was considered as a start-up farm size at the initial stages of no-till introduction. The underlying reason for this assumption was that 4 000 hectares farm can be serviced by two 6-meter wide seed drills (one disk 95 No-till technology adoption as compared with conventional and one anchor). These seed drills are among the smallest tillage and No-till technology adoption as compared with available in the Ukrainian agriculture machinery market. minimal tillage. 71 Table 35: Investments and depreciation USD thousands Conventional tillage Minimum tillage No-till Investment in machinery 620 880 880 Tractors 180 360 360 Depreciation in % 15 13 10 Seeders 90 170 170 Depreciation in % 15 15 15 Sprayers 50 50 50 Depreciation in % 10 10 10 Harvesters 300 300 300 Depreciation in % 10 10 10 Other investments 500 880 1 360 Depreciation in % 5 5 5 TOTAL INVESTMENTS 1 120 1 760 2 240 Investment per hectare 280 440 560 depreciation per ha per year 25 38 41 Table 36: Crop budgets Winter wheat Corn Sunflower Soya USD per ha Conv. Min. No. Conv. Min. No. Conv. Min. No. Conv. Min. No. Seeds 180 180 180 141 141 141 78 78 78 92.4 92.4 92.4 kg 250 250 250 25 25 25 10 10 10 110 110 110 price (USD/kg) 0.72 0.72 0.72 5.64 5.64 5.64 7.8 7.8 7.8 0.84 0.84 0.84 Fertilizers 109 109 109 245 245 245 122 122 122 135 135 135 N (kg) 100 100 100 200 200 200 90 90 90 200 200 200 N price (USD/kg) 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.396 0.396 0.396 0.396 0.396 0.396 0.396 0.396 0.396 P (kg) 100 100 100 190 190 190 100 100 100 50 50 50 P price (USD/kg) 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 K (kg) 0 0 0 80 80 80 40 40 40 50 50 50 K price (USD/kg) 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 Pesticides 11 11 11 7 7 7 4 4 4 5 5 5 Fungicides and other chem. 41 41 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Herbicides 4 4 24 25 25 76 12 12 51 10 10 51 Fuel 110 66 33 110 66 33 110 66 33 110 66 33 L 100 60 30 100 60 30 100 60 30 100 60 30 price (USD/L) 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 Total materials 455 411 398 528 484 502 326 282 288 353 309 317 Land lease 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 Machinery Maintenance 22 16 10 33 22 10 18 14 10 18 14 10 Labour 50 38 26 50 38 26 50 38 26 50 38 26 Product handling (per Tonne) 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Total production costs 633 569 537 729 659 653 472 412 402 497 437 429 72 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Table 37: Crop yields, prices and revenue Wheat Corn Sunflower Soya Yields (tonnes/ha) 4.7 6 2 1.8 Price (EXW, USD/tonne) 200 185 460 460 Sales 940 1 110 920 828 Minimum tillage and no-till are characterized by assumed that yields over a three year cycle will higher investment needs in machinery (more be influenced by one normal, one favourable and powerful tractors and modern direct seeding one unfavourable year in order to reflect typical equipment) and additional investment cost for new grain production variability. In the favourable year technology adoption (considered under other costs the yields under all three technologies should in Table 35. This additional investment cost for new increase by 20 percent, but in the unfavourable technology adoption was estimated at USD 240 year yields are expected to decrease by per hectare for CA/no-till and USD 120 per 25 percent with the use of conventional and hectare for minimum tillage; including the costs of minimum tillage technologies and only by maintaining productivity during the transition period 19 percent with the adoption of CA/no-till. (additional application of mineral fertilizers). Sales revenues for each crop and technology Based on anticipated machinery use (wear and were calculated based on EXW96 demand prices tear) we assumed different depreciation rates (average over the last three years). and calculated depreciation cost per hectare. The In order to account for the negative effects of model also assumed that different technologies erosion after the 5th project year, we considered may require various levels of replacement after a gradual decrease of yields up to minus full depreciation. 25 percent in farms adopting conventional tillage and up to minus 21 percent in farms adopting Financial needs for each technology were minimum tillage. calculated by taking into account both initial investment capital (resources spent in purchasing Based on the Ukrainian fiscal legislation and substitution of machinery and other assets) applicable to the agricultural sector, a Single and operational capital (resources spent to cover Agricultural Tax (SAT) was charged. SAT is first year operational costs and possible negative calculated as 0.5 percent of the official value of cash flows). Sixty percent of all the financial agricultural lands used by the company. needs are expected to be covered by the farms own capital. The remainder is considered to be Based on the above assumption, for each covered through loans from commercial banks at specific technology the following financial a 15 percent annual interest rate. aggregates were calculated over a 10 year period: EBITDA (earnings before interest taxes The estimated crop budgets for each technology depreciation and amortization, EBITDA = Gross and each crop are shown in Table 36. Sales – Production Costs), net operative profit (Net Operative Profit = EBITDA – Depreciation), Many of the costs in the crop budget of each EBT (earnings before taxes, EBT = Net technology are the same, while the main Operative Profit – Interest on capital) and net difference is determined by herbicides, fuel income (Net Income = EBT – Taxes). Based on costs, machinery and labour costs. a specifically designed net cash flow (Net CF = Net Income – Investment +Depreciation + Average reference yields were assumed to Interests on capital) at a 15 percent discount rate remain the same for each technology (see (r) the NPV (NPV= – (Investment) + Table 37). These reference yields are expected ) of the investments was calculated. Based to fluctuate over time with different intensity depending on the technology. In particular we 96 Ex Works. 73 Table 38: Main investment efficiency indicators for specific technology USD thousands Conventional tillage Minimum tillage No-till Total investment 1 201 1 883 2 291 Total credit 1 380 1 535 1 704 inc. operational capital 900 782 788 Total loan servicing 277 336 405 NPV 4 723 5 523 6 685 Net income 8 766 11 286 15 473 Net income per ha (USD) 219 282 387 Table 39: Main investment efficiency indicators (incremental) USD thousands No-till Vs. conventional No-till Vs. minimum Additional investment 1 120 480 NPV 1 962 1 162 IRR 41% 41% Net income 6 706 4 186 Net income per ha per year (USD) 167 104 on incremental net cash flow the model also CA/no-till generates a positive incremental98 NPV calculates the incremental NPV and IRR97. of almost USD 2 million over a -year project, compared with conventional technology. The The model has shown that additional investments corresponding incremental increase in the internal required for the adoption of the technology (new rate of return (IRR) approximates 41 percent; and machinery, investment in maintaining soil fertility an incremental annual net income of USD 167 per and weed control during the initial stages of hectare. If compared with minimum tillage, CA/ technology adoption, etc) are well recouped by no-till generates: (i) a positive incremental NPV of the additional income generated. USD 1.2 million in ten years; (ii) an incremental IRR of 41 percent; and (iii) an incremental annual net Under the above-mentioned assumptions, our income per hectare of USD 104. investment simulation model generated the following main efficiency indicators for each Based on the scale factor assumed in this analysis specific technology (conventional, minimum (adoption of no-till on 3 million hectares in the tillage and no-till). short-term, 9 million hectares in the medium- term and 17 million hectares in the long-term), In particular, CA/no-till farm with almost the incremental net income from the introduction USD 2.3 million of investment can expect of no-till can generate a cumulated countrywide to obtain a NPV of over USD 6.6 million. financial benefit to farmers would be99: Conventional technology is less demanding in initial investments and is characterized by lower • short-term: USD 0.41 billion; NPV of USD 4.7 million. • medium-term: USD 1.23 billion; and • long-term: USD 2.31 billion. With conventional technology farmers can expect on average USD 219 of net income per hectare per year, switching to CA/no-till allows them to increase 98 Indicators were calculated based on incremental CF which net incomes to USD 387 per hectare per year. was calculated as the difference between specific CF of each technology. The cumulated country-wide financial benefit to farmers 99  was calculated multiplying average incremental net income 97 Internal rate of return. by the scale factor. 74 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Sensitivity of investment in CA/no-till negatively on the country’s image as a reliable to main risks trade partner. In order to evaluate the vulnerability of We assumed a reduction of crop production investments in each specific technology to risks, variability with the introduction of CA/no-till in our we also performed an investment sensitivity investment model (no-till technology mitigates analysis. The main risk for Ukraine is the market the negative effects on yields in drought years by risk. EXW demand prices in the country are 25-35 percent). Reduction of production volatility strongly influenced by international prices and would allow the country to maintain higher export sharp declines of international grain prices are levels during climatically unfavourable years. quickly transmitted from international markets On the basis of the scale factor assumed in this directly to producers. analysis, the introduction of CA/no-till would produce the following additional supply of cereals The sensitivity analysis took into account (wheat and corn equivalent) in drought years EXW demand price fluctuations. The analysis (once every three to five years): shows that investment in the CA/no-till farming model is more resistant to market risks than the conventional one. A CA/no-till farm would • short-term: 0.3 million tonnes of wheat and probably remain profitable even if grain sale 0.6 million tonnes of corn; prices decreased by 34 percent from the baseline • medium-term: 1 million tonnes of wheat and scenario considered in the model. This is not the 1.7 million tonnes of corn; and case of investment in conventional technology. • long-term: 2 million tonnes of wheat and The conventional tillage technology generates a 3.3 million tonnes of corn. negative return (NPV) if prices decrease by more than 24 percent. This additional supply of cereals is also expected to generate off-farm benefits (mainly to traders Country level benefits and intermediaries). In drought years (once every three to five years) additional benefits were Reduced variability of production as a result of estimated to amount to101: CA at the enterprise level can result in positive economic benefits at country and global level • short-term: USD 54 million; through increasing agricultural production and export stabilization, which will ultimately lead to • medium-term: USD 161 million; and improved global food security. • long-term: USD 304 million. Reduction in volatility of national production of Additional benefits at the national level are cereals and oilseeds is particularly important expected to derive from the reduction of erosion as it affects the country’s capacity to export as an effect of CA/no-till introduction. grains, oilseeds and vegetable oils. This aspect is particularly relevant in the light of highly volatile The benefit from reduced soil erosion was yields. In 2003, because of the lowest production quantified on the basis of expert estimates of cereals and high grain exports in the previous on SOM and NPK nutrient losses because of marketing year, Ukraine had to import wheat. erosion in Ukraine. Of 32.5 million hectares Based on what was considered a potential threat of arable land, SOM losses amount to 20- to national food security, MAPFU imposed bans 25 million tonnes per year (0.6-0.8 tonnes of on grain exports in 2006, 2007 and 2010. These SOM per hectare per year) and NPK nutrients three episodes caused not only economic losses losses amount to 0.96 million tonnes of for grain traders and farmers 100 but impacted The amounts were calculated with the assumption that 101  the area under CA/no-till is cultivated only under wheat and corn. The total corresponding values have been computed Due to a fall of internal EXW demand prices. 100  in average FOB export prices minus EXW demand prices. 75 nitrogen, 0.68 million tonnes of phosphorus supply of cereals deriving from CA/no-till area and 9.7 million tonnes of potassium per year. would be able to feed a further: The market value of eroded NPK nutrients 102 amounts to over USD 5 billion per year (USD 157 • short-term: 5.4 million people; per hectare). Adopting CA/no-till would reduce • medium-term: 16.1 million people; and erosion by up to 75 percent and thus save • long-term: 30.4 million people. about USD 117 per hectare. At country level (considering the adoption factor assumed in this Carbon sequestration provides global benefits analysis), the introduction CA/no-till would allow with a potential to generate income at national savings of: level. Benefits in terms of carbon sequestration and decreased emissions have been calculated • short-term: up to USD 0.35 billion; through EX-ACT103.Thanks to its capacity to • medium-term: up to USD 1.06 billion; and mitigate CO2 emissions, the introduction of • long-term: up to USD 2 billion. CA/no-till in Ukraine can reduce annual CO2 emissions by: The adoption of CA/no-till is expected to reduce fuel consumption for grain and oilseed production • short-term: 0.5 million tonnes; by 50 litres per hectare on average (70 and 30 • medium-term: 4.6 million tonnes; and litres compared with conventional and minimum • long-term: 5.6 million tonnes. tillage). At country level it will allow an average annual saving of: Carbon markets are diverse, unstable and unreliable. For these reasons we avoid showing • short-term: 150 million litres; among the actual projected benefits those • medium-term: 450 million litres; and that would accrue by providing a value to the • long-term: 850 million litres. sequestered amounts of carbon in our scenarios. Should the reader want a value, at a price of Based on fuel import prices the average values USD 0.5 per tonne (Nasdaq Certified Emission would be: Reduction104), the benefits from CO2 reduction would amount to: • short-term: USD 110 million; • medium-term: USD 331 million; and • short-term: USD 0.3 million; • long-term: USD 625  million. • medium-term: USD 2.3 million; and • long-term: USD 2.8 million. However, such benefits have not been calculated at the national level. They have been considered exclusively as farm/enterprise level benefits. Global level benefits CA/no-till introduction is expected to generate benefits also at a global level. Additional amounts of cereals produced during drought years can reduce export supply volatility and thus contribute to improving global food security. Considering average annual consumption of 130  X-ACT is a tool developed by FAO and aimed at providing 103 E ex-ante estimates of the impact of agriculture and forestry kg of cereals/per capita/per year, the increased development projects on GHG emissions and carbon sequestration, indicating its effects on the C-balance, an indicator of the mitigation potential of the project.  owever, considering CO2 EU Allowances carbon is 104 H assumed traded at the same stock market at a price of AgroInvest UA Index, http://www.uaindex.net. 102  USD 4.44 /tonne. 76 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Annex 8 - Institutional settings According to Regulation Nr.500 of MAPFU, of unproductive, degraded and contaminated approved by the President of Ukraine on April 23 agricultural land.106 2011, the Ministry is responsible for the formation and implementation of the Agrarian Policy of The State Agency of Land Resources of Ukraine Ukraine. The Department of Engineering and is the central executive authority on land Technical Support and Agricultural Engineering of resources activity. It is directed and coordinated MAPFU is a subdivision of the Ministry. The main by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine through tasks of the department are implementation of the MAPFU; it is included in the system of state policy on engineering and technical support bodies of the executive power and ensures the and development of the national agricultural implementation of state policy in the field of land machinery production, which includes: relations.107 This agency is the central executive authority on land resources activity and is • development of standardization systems responsible for all land legislation application and and certification of agricultural technical administrative matters, including the obligations equipment; to ensure preparation and performance of organizational, economic, ecologic and other • development and implementation of measures directed at a rational use and the measures aimed at technical and protection of lands. Through a statutory State technological modernization of agriculture; Committee of Land Resources it ensures • development of energy saving technologies; preparation and performance of organizational, and economic, ecologic and other measures directed • ensuring and promoting scientific research. at a rational usage of lands, their protection from harmful anthropological impact, as well as at In the last decade, amongst the various increasing soil fertility and productivity. strategic objectives of the Ministry and its departments, much emphasis was placed on UHMC108 is responsible for meteorological, soil fertility preservation in Ukraine. In view agrometeorological and hydrological data and of the battle against soil degradation and loss information. The centre represents Ukraine of fertility due to erosion, for the last eight to at the World Meteorological Organization. As ten years MAPFU has been advocating for the such it also participates in the implementation advancement of resources savings technologies of the UNFCCC. UHMC has a modern in Ukraine and in particular of no-till105. This approach to agrometeorology: “Agricultural target is part of a strategy that was issued by meteorology has passed the development of MAPFU in 2007, the “State target programme qualitative, descriptive level of observations of the development of Ukrainian village for the and assessments of soil and crops to . This programme outlines the period until 2015” modern methods of observations, including urgent needs of innovation and investments in satellite information, modelling processes strengthening the material and technical base and phenomena occurring in the “agricultural of the agricultural sector, the introduction of object - environment”109. Agrometeorological environmentally friendly, resource and energy observations are carried out at meteorological saving technologies, implementing conservation 106 See http://minagro.gov.ua/apk?nid=2976. 107 See http://www.dazru.gov.ua/terra/control/en/. 105 ìSee http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/en/publish/article?art_ 108 See www.meteo.gov.ua. id=20455267&cat_id=244315200. 109 http://www.meteo.gov.ua/. 77 stations located at a distance of about 50 km • slow technical and technological from each other (there is a network of 140 modernization; and agro-met stations), that allows highlighting the • consequent low productivity. agrometeorological situation at national level and in specific areas, with sufficient accuracy to Amongst the main goals of this strategy are: obtain current weather conditions data and their influence on major crops. Agrometeorological • increasing competitiveness of agricultural information is produced daily and at fixed decade production; intervals. Observations include: phenology; • increasing manufacturability and decreasing crop height; crop population density; weeds, use of input material in agricultural pest and disease damage; productive humidity; production; crop wintering and overall crop conditions’ assessment. Main crops being observed are: • increasing share of the soil cultivated by using wheat, rye, barley, canola, oats, corn, buckwheat, minimal or no-tillage technologies.110 millet, peas, soybeans, sunflower, spring rape, sugar beet, perennial herbs, fruit and grapes. The national Institute for Soil Sciences and Agro-chemistry Research (O.N. Sokolovskiy) of The National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of NAAS was established in 1959 as a successor Ukraine (NAAS) is a state research organization of the Department of Soil Sciences at the responsible for ensuring the scientific Kharkiv Agricultural Institute and the Ukrainian development of agricultural in Ukraine. It Scientific-Research Institute for soil sciences of conducts fundamental scientific research in the the Ministry of Agriculture of the USSR. Basic field of agriculture by developing on the basis of activities of this NSC include: the scientific knowledge of new products aimed at sector efficiency development. The NAAS is • development of the new scientific directions composed of 301 institutions, research institutes, in soil science, agrochemistry and soil centres and enterprises. The Academy employs protection; 25 500 people including 5 000 scientists, 331 • scientific provisions of rational exploitation of doctors and 1 698 science candidates. With the land resources, protection and increase of the aim of the practical application of scientific soil fertility; achievements the NAAS has a vast network of • scientific justification of the national and state associated institutes and research centres all over programmes; the country. In 2012 NAAS adopted a strategy • scientific-methodological standardization and of development of the agricultural sector (until metrological provisions in soil sciences and 2020). The strategy aimed at development of agro-chemistry industries; an effective, resource-saving, environmentally- friendly, socially oriented, knowledge-based • elaboration of the modern agro-technologies economy that can satisfy domestic demand and in soils fertilization and increase of soil ensure a leading position in world market for fertility; Ukrainian agricultural and food products. The main • preparation of scientific personnel; problems of agricultural development accordingly • creation of modern soil/geo-information to this strategy are: systems with the aim of improving the diagnosis of soils conditions, and their • insufficient dissemination of highly innovative estimation and classification; and technologies, and their adaptation to the needs and economic possibilities of Development of methodology of observation agricultural production; of soil coverage on the basis of modern • low level of innovation in the agricultural technologies. sector; 110 See http://uaan.gov.ua/. 78 Ukraine: Soil fertility to strengthen climate resilience Main achievements of the NSC include: The development of machinery and technologies testing activities in Ukraine is directly related to • large-scale soil mapping (1957-1961); the creation of the “Ukrainian Research Institute of Forecasting and Testing of Equipment and • soil grouping, zoning and classification; Technologies for Agricultural Production named • identification of regularities in soil processes after Leonid Pogorilyy” (Ukr SRIFTT named after and regimes; L.Pogorilyy). • studies on soil fertility; and • studies on erosion of soils. The National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine (NULES) is one of the Recently the Institute elaborated: leading educational, scientific and cultural establishments of Ukraine. Over 37 000 students • strategy of balanced exploitation, and more than 600 PhD Doctoral students are reproduction and management of soil studying at 21 faculties of the Kyiv Territorial resources; Centre, at the Southern Affiliate “Crimean Agro- • national report “On state of Ukrainian soils Technological University” and at 12 regional fertility”; higher educational institutions. Regarding the agricultural research sector, NULES educational • concept papers on chemical amelioration of activities are aimed at the dissemination of acid and salty soils; and scientific and technical knowledge and advanced • concept papers on agrochemical procurement experience among employees of the agricultural of agriculture for the period until 2015. economic sector, in order to improve their educational and professional level. The National Scientific Centre “Institute of Agriculture”111 of NAAS has a history going back • The Department of Soil Science and Soil to 1900 with the creation of the agrochemical Conservation named after Prof M.K.Shykula113 laboratory of Kyiv Society of Agriculture and was founded in 1922. Students, post- Agricultural industry to conduct analysis on soil graduate, and master students are involved samples and seeds in order to help increase in scientific work. The department presents agricultural productivity. Since then the Institute a scientific school of conservation farming - has developed significant theoretical information research and development of soil cultivation on crop rotation, optimization of seeding technology based on minimum tillage and processes, anti-erosion measures and practices organic agriculture. Scientific works on soil and fertilization. conservation technologies were developed by the scientists of the Department on the basis The National Scientific Centre “Institute of of long-term field researches for the main Mechanization and Electrification”112 of NAAS soil-climatic zones of Ukraine, demonstrating was founded on April 3rd, 1930 by Council the advantages that these technologies decision of the People’s Commissars of the provide on soil properties and fertility and Soviet Union. The Institutes main activities are: consequently on crop production. • development of energy-saving technology; • development mechanization, automationan delectrification of agricultural production; and • creation of modern competitive machines, mechanisms, equipment and other technical facilities. 111 See http://zemlerobstvo.com/. 112 See http://nnc-imesg.gov.ua. 113 See http://nubip.edu.ua/node/1232. 79 Please address questions and comments to: Investment Centre Division Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Viale delle Terme di Caracalla – 00153 Rome, Italy I3905E/1/06.14 investment-centre@fao.org www.fao.org/investment/en Report No. 9 – June 2014