• Rural Digital Europe
• Research dataclose
• European Commission close
• EU close

Parcel soil scan with electric conductivity measurement from Netherlands

ISIMIP-2a climate data cutout provided for Sardinia in the framework of SIM4NEXUS

ISIMIP-2a climate data cutout provided for Sardinia in the framework of SIM4NEXUS

Parcel soil scan with electric conductivity measurement from Netherlands

The five scenarios describe plausible changes in 15 external drivers of the socioecosystem of the Mar Menor and surrounding Campo de Cartagena between 1964 and 2070. These scenarios were developed for evaluation of their impacts on Key Performance Indicators of sustainability using a simulation model based on System Dynamics. This model, developed by Martínez-López et al (2022) can be consulted here. Historic data combined with the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) from the IPCC report ‘Global warming of 1.5°C’ and the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), were used as starting point to develop the model-specific scenarios. The five scenarios are based on SSP 1, SSP2, SSP4 and SSP5 in combination with emission scenarios that will keep global temperature rise below 1.5ºC. The BAU scenario represents a combination of SSP2 without any climate change. The detailed documentation of SSPs from O’Neil et al (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.004) and subsequent expert interviews and input received during stakeholder workshops organised in the framework of the COASTAL project were used to prepare the region-specific time-series of the 15 variables for the Mar Menor and surrounding Campo de Cartagena. The 15 external drivers are: Agricultural revenue per hectare Growth rate of agriculture Percentage of nutrients that are metabolized by the native lagoon ecosystem Average excess of fertilizer use Yearly effectiveness in nutrients reduction of nutrients, soil and water retention measures Electricity Price Mean number of hours per day of photovoltaic electricity production Photovoltaic energy facilities growth rate in Megawatts installed Growth rate of tourism Average percentage of groundwater desalinated Agricultural water demand per hectare Catchment water sources Urban wastewater treatment plant effluents Yearly average of sea water desalination Amount of water transferred from the Tagus river (RCP15ATS)

Parcel soil scan with electric conductivity measurement from Netherlands

Parcel soil scan with electric conductivity measurement from Netherlands

Parcel soil scan with electric conductivity measurement from Netherlands

This Data Set is derived from the WP4 of the AgriLink project. It is part of task T4.4 of Work Package (WP) 4 of the H2020 AgriLink project. AgriLink [Agricultural Knowledge: linking farmers, advisors and researchers to boost innovation] aims at better understanding the role of advisory services in farmers’ decision making and at boosting their contribution to innovation for sustainable development of agriculture. WP4 addresses more specifically the governance of farm advisory services. The objective of the research presented in this report is to understand the institutions that influence how farm advisory services function on the ground, and to discuss implications for the support for sustainable development innovation. Data were collected in seven European countries: the Czech Republic, France, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the UK. Data were collected for a diversity of types of innovation: Market, Technological, Process, and Social Innovation. The Data set was built based on interviews with farm advisory suppliers. In total 170 farm advisory suppliers were interviewed. The table below provides the distribution of interviews according to countries. Country Market innovation (NCRO & RETRO) Technological innovation (TECH) Process innovation (BIOP & SOIL) Social innovation (LABO & COMM) TOTAL Czech Republic 4 16 20 France 14 11 25 Greece 11 10 21 Poland 6 18 24 Portugal 11 20 31 Spain 9 29 38 UK 7 4 11 TOTAL 34 28 75 33 170 The data has two aims. First, to characterise farm advisory suppliers, in terms of (table below): what do they provide? Who is in control of the supplier? What do they provide Farmers NGO Private Public semi-public Total Advice and Bookkeeping 8 4 1 13 Advice and Digital tech 1 3 4 Advice and Education 2 4 3 5 14 Advice and Health services 1 2 3 Advice and Inputs 1 14 15 Advice and Inputs and Outputs 15 5 20 Advice and Machinery 7 7 Advice and Outputs 8 1 8 2 19 Advice and Research 2 2 5 12 1 22 Only advice and training 16 26 10 1 53 Total 53 7 76 32 2 170 Second, we have set a series of variables to characterise the services they provide. The main variables are: Number of advisors of the organisation Number of advisors Number of organisations in that group [0:5] 96 ]10:50] 35 ]5:10] 16 >50 19 n.a. 4 Total 170 Percentage of advisors in the staff of the organisation % of advisors Number of organisations [0:25[ 43 [25:50[ 17 [50:75[ 30 [75:100] 70 n.a. 10 Total 170 Share of back-office activities in the staff of the organisation Share of back-office (%) Number of organisations [0:25[ 41 [25:50[ 26 [50:75[ 66 [75:100] 24 n.a. 13 Total 170 Number of farmers client of the supplier per advisor Number of clients per organisation Number of organisation [0:25[ 31 [25:75[ 43 [50:75[ 3 [75:175[ 28 >175 36 n.a. 29 Total 170 Main advisory method Main Advisory method Number of organisations Group Advice 19 IT tool (app, software…) 2 n.a. 1 One to One Advice 129 Phone or web helpdesk 15 Publications 4 Total 170 Main funding source Main funding source Number of organisations EU funds 15 Fee-for-advice 46 Joint trade 42 Membership 11 Membership fee 6 n.a. 16 Public funding 3 Public funds 4 State budget 27 Total 170 More detailed information about the variables collected can be found in the questionnaire that is available in the appendix of the deliverable D4.2 of AgriLink