29. To be relevant and effective, SLM technology must meet certain key criteria:
(i) Technology must be scientifically proven through reliable and data-driven information, repeatable and measureable results, soil-specific agronomic yields, and objectivity-based conclusions. In addition, the choice of SLM technology must be based on local validation through participatory on-farm research.
(ii) The benefits (agronomic and economic) must be concrete, highly visible, and substantial and must accrue directly to the local producers. In situations where crop yields are extremely low (1 t/ha in rainfed farming in SSA, and SA), a technology which increases yield by 10 to 15% may not be sufficient. In view of the increasing population and rising food demand, SLM technology may need to triple or quadruple crop yields over a short period of 5 to 10 years. Therefore, productivity, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and profitability are important considerations.
(iii) The SLM technology must be ecologically compatible, especially with regards to the current and projected CC. Important ecological factors are drought stress, unfavorable temperatures, high incidence of pests and pathogens, and increase in risks of erosion and other extreme events.
(iv) The SLM technologies must be socially acceptable and ethically grounded. The severe problem of soil degradation can be reversed by creating awareness about the stewardship of land resources. Faith-based and cultural organizations must be involved to teach responsibility, respect, generational/gender/social equity, fairness, and societal values of natural resources through SLM.
(v) Political support and acceptibility is extremely important to any SLM technology and strategy. The Green Revolution largely by-passed SSA partly due to lack of political support. It is now taking root in some countries of SSA (e.g., Malawi, Ghana) maily because of political support. Visionary leadership, committed to national progress and economic growth (rather than personal), is essential to relevance and effectiveness of SLM options.
(vi) SLM adaptation technologies must be considered as an integral component of the mitigation options. These should be considered neither as policy alternatives, nor as opposite to mitigation. In addition, SLM technologies that have appreciable mitigation benefits should be given the prominence they deserve, relative to other industrial mitigation technologies (e.g., clean coal, CCS).
(vii) There must by a minimal of trade-offs in terms of competition for land, water, nutrients, energy, etc. SLM technologies requiring additional inputs, are essential to advancing food security, restoring ecosystesm services, and improving the environment. In comparison, forest plantations would require additional water, nutrients and lands. Increasing food crop productivity through SLM is potentially important to limiting atmospheric CO2 concentrations (Wise et al., 2009). In view of these considerations, SLM technologies for four prominent ecoregions are described in the following sections.
