EASP-5/19/Report
5th Plenary Meeting of the Eurasian Soil Partnership
Chisinau, Republic of Moldova October 30 – September 1, 2019
2
EASP-5/19/Report
5th Plenary Meeting of the Eurasian Soil Partnership
Chisinau, Republic of Moldova, October 30 – September 1, 2019
Report prepared by the Secretariats of the Eurasian Soil Partnership and the Global Soil
Partnership.
Chair: Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova (Uzbekistan)
Vice-chair: Mr. Iurie Mosoi (Moldova)
Regional facilitator: Ms. Natalia Rodriguez Eugenio (GSP secretariat)
EASP Secretariat (Russian Federation, Eurasian Center for Food Security of Lomonosov Moscow
State University):
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov - Executive Secretary
The following EASP Secretariat members took over the leadership for the pillars of action:
Mr. Alexey Sorokin (Pillar 1), Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva (Pillar 2), Ms. Maria Konyushkova (Pillar 3),
Mr. Oleg Golozubov (Pillar 4) and Ms. Olga Yakimenko (Pillar 5).
D i s c l a i m e r
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), or of Lomonosov Moscow State University (MSU) 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, or MSU in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO, or MSU.
3
Table of Contents
List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................. 4
General description of the meeting ............................................................................................................... 5
1 Welcoming remarks and tour de table........................................................................................................ 6
2 GSP developments of regional interest (Natalia Rodriguez) ....................................................................... 6
3 EASP Work Progress .................................................................................................................................... 8
3.1 General report on EASP results for 2018-2019 (Gulchekhra Khasanklhanova) ................................... 8
3.1.1 Work Progress on Pillar 1 (Hakki Erdogan) .................................................................................. 11
3.1.2 Work Progress on Pillar 2 (Elena Sukhacheva) ............................................................................ 11
3.1.3 Work Progress on Pillar 3 (Svyatoslav Baliuk) ............................................................................. 12
3.1.4 Work Progress on Pillar 4 (Oleg Golozubov) ............................................................................... 14
3.1.5 Work Progress on Pillar 5 (Hukmatullo Akhmadov) .................................................................... 15
3.2 Interactions with the ESP to establish an effective RESOLAN (Hakki Erdogan) ................................. 16
3.3 Results on 5 Pillars discussion ............................................................................................................ 17
4 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 discussion .................................................................................... 18
5 GEF and SSM – preparation of regional project ........................................................................................ 21
6 Relevant national and global initiatives .................................................................................................... 23
6.1. National activities .............................................................................................................................. 23
6.2 EASP contribution to global products (Pavel Krasilnikov) .................................................................. 27
6.3 Support to the promotion of SSM – GSP Phase II Results (Natalia Rodriguez) .................................. 28
6.4 EASP Synergies with other initiatives (Ronald Vargas)....................................................................... 29
6.5 Book on SSM in Eurasian region discussion (Pavel Krasilnikov) ......................................................... 30
7 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 adoption and move forward ....................................................... 30
8 Formation of WGs on five Pillars and selecting WG Coordinators ............................................................ 31
Annex I – List of Participants ........................................................................................................................ 33
Annex II – Agenda ......................................................................................................................................... 34
Annex III – EASP Implementation plan ......................................................................................................... 36
Annex IV – EASP Working Groups ................................................................................................................ 43
Annex V – Draft contents of the book .......................................................................................................... 44
4
List of Acronyms
CA: Central Asia
CACILM : Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management
CD: Capacity Development
CIRCASA: Coordination of International Research Cooperation on Soil Carbon Sequestration in Agriculture
EASP: Eurasian Soil Partnership
EASIS: Eurasian Soil Information System
EC: European Commission
ECFS: Eurasian Center for Food Security of Lomonosov Moscow State University
EU: European Union
EUROSOLAN: Eurasian Soil Laboratory Network
FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Fertilizer Code: The International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of Fertilizers
NFP: National focal point
GEF: Global Environment Facility
GLOSIS: Global Soil Information System
GLOSOLAN: Global Soil Laboratory Network
GSOCmap: Global Soil Organic Carbon map
GSOCseq Programme: Global assessment of soil organic carbon sequestration potential Programme
GSOP: Global Symposium on Soil Pollution
GSP: Global Soil Partnership
ICARDA: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
ICBA: International Center for Biosaline Agriculture
INBS: International Network on Black Soils
INSAS: International Network of Salt-Affected Soils
ITPS: Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils
JRC: Joint Research Center of EC
LDN: Land Degradation Neutrality
LUS: Land use strategy
NGO: Non-governmental organization
RESOLAN: Regional European Soil Laboratory Network
RIP: Regional implementation plan
RSP: Regional Soil Partnership
R&D Platform: Global Soil R&D Platform
SDF: Soil Data Facility
SDG: Sustainable Development Goal
SIS: Soil Information System
SSM: sustainable soil management
SLM: sustainable land management
SWSR: Status of the World Soil Resources
VGSSM: Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management UNCBD: United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity
UNCCD: United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
WG: Working group
WOCAT: World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies
5
General description of the meeting
The 5th Plenary Meeting of the Eurasian Soil Partnership (EASP) took place on September 30 – October 1
2019 in Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. The meeting was jointly organized by the Secretariat of the Global
Soil Partnership (GSP), Eurasian Center for Food Security of Lomonosov Moscow State University, Institute
of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo, the National Society of Soil
Scientists of the Republic of Moldova on the basis of the Moldavian State University with the support of the
Ministry of Agriculture, Regional Development and Environment of the Republic of Moldova. The event was
attended by representatives of Armenia, Belarus, the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, the Russian
Federation, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, totally 28 participants (see Annex 1 – List of
Participants).
At the meeting, the results of the EASP activities on the 5 Pillars of the GSP for 2018-2019 were discussed,
the Regional Implementation Plan (RIR) for 2020-2023 was agreed and adopted, global and national
initiatives and the EASP contribution to support sustainable soil management (SSM), and next steps are
outlined. The program of the meeting is given in Annex 2.
The representative of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock of Turkey, and the Chair of European
Soil Partnership (ESP) Pillar 5 and of the EASP Pillar 1 Mr. Hakki Erdogan, made a presentation on the
interaction in the field of harmonization of analytical methods and measurement results between the ESP
and the EASP. Participants supported the previously proposed initiative on the creation of a regional
network of soil laboratories under the Global Soil Laboratory Network (GLOSOLAN) project. The
constitutive and first meeting of EUROSOLAN were held in Chisinau after the 5th Plenary EASP meeting
on October 2-4.
In the discussion of the RIP for 2020-2023 special attention was paid to the strategy of financial resource
mobilization. In particular, it was decided to participate in the preparation of the regional project of the
Global Environment Facility (GEF, stage 7) to maintain a balance between the conservation and use of soil
resources in the Eurasian region. The prospects for further EASP interaction with international
organizations and programs, such as the Regional Office for Central Asia and the Caucasus of the
International Center for Agricultural Research in Arid Regions (ICARDA), the World Bank, the World
Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT), the Coordination of International
Research Cooperation on Soil Carbon Sequestration in Agriculture (CIRCASA) and others were also
considered. Corrected EASP implementation plan for 2020-2023 presented in the table in Annex 3.
Participants were asked to nominate and agree on a list of Working Groups (WG) for each Pillar as soon as
possible after the meeting. Proposals were received by the GSP Secretariat from all EASP countries,
excluding Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. The list of WGs members is given in Annex 4.
As a result of the meeting, the Chisinau Communiqué was adopted, where the commitments and intentions
of the members of the EASP for 2020-2023 were fixed.
After the 5th Plenary meeting the International Scientific Conference «East European Chernozems - 140
years after V.V. Dokuchaev» took place in Chisinau(October 2-3). The conference was organized by the
Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo, the National Society
of Soil Scientists of the Republic of Moldova and the Moldavian State University with the support of GSP
FAO and International Network on Black Soils (INBS). The event was attended by over 100 participants
from 24 countries. Within the framework of the conference, field excursions to the profiles of Chernozems
6
which were studied by V.V. Dokuchaev, as well as to the research long-term field experimental station of
the Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo were held.
The 2nd Meeting of the INBS, was also took place after the conference on October 4 in Chisinau.
Thus, the 5th Plenary meeting of the EASP was held along with other important events within the
framework of the GSP.
1 Welcoming remarks and tour de table
The event began with welcoming remarks by Mr. Mihai Lezanu, Dean of the Faculty of Biology and Soil
Science of the Moldavian State University, within the walls of which the meeting was held.
Then the meeting was welcomed by Prof. Gheorghe Jigău, President of the National Society of Soil
Scientists of the Republic of Moldova. Prof. Gheorghe Jigău told about the history of the development of
soil science in Moldova: from soil science classes as part of household courses to the first Congresses of soil
scientists in Chisinau. Prof. Gheorghe Jigueu drew attention to the various management decision mistakes
in the world practice made due to the fact that the role of soils was not taken into account. Thus, in the
discussions on climate change, the influence of soil cover on climate is often not taken into account. The
speaker urged the participants to recognize the responsibility for notifying decision makers about the
regulatory function of soils.
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez Eugenio, welcomed participants on behalf of the GSP Secretariat, expressed
gratitude to the leadership of the Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after
Nicolae Dimo for organizing the meeting and outlined some significant results of the EASP for 2017-2019,
such as:
• Strengthening cooperation and capacity development (CD) in the field of SSM;
• Publication of the Handbook for saline soil management (FAO, 2017);
• Contribution to the creation of the Global Soil Organic Carbon map (FAO, 2017).
Then, Dr. Iurie Moshoi, Director of the Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named
after Nicolae Dimo, delivered a welcoming speech. Dr. Iurie Moshoy thanked colleagues for the
participation and invited everyone to introduce themselves. The list of attendees is given in Annex 1. Also,
Dr. Iurie Moshoy highlighted the program of soil science related events in Chisinau for the week from
September 30 to October 1.
2 GSP developments of regional interest (Natalia Rodriguez)
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez presented a report on the activities of the GSP in 2019 and on actions that are of
interest and recommended for the implementation of the GSP goals for each Pillar in the Eurasian region.
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/general-report-on-the-activities-of-the-eurasian-soil-
partnership-easp-in-2017-2019 (English).
Pillar 1: Promote sustainable management of soil resources for soil protection, conservation and
sustainable productivity.
Action 1: Implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management (VGSSM) at the
national level. Main proposed approach: organization of national multi-stakeholder workshops. Ms. Natalia
Rodriguez exemplified such workshops and their positive results in Costa Rica and Thailand.
7
Action 2: Submit successful case studies on the implementation of SSM practices. Contact person in the
GSP Secretariat – Ms. Zineb Bazza.
Action 3: Disseminate the International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of
Fertilizers (Fertilizer Code) at the national and regional level.
Action 4: Implement the principles of the Fertilizer Code at the national level. The GSP Secretariat is ready
to support these activities. Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 3 and 4 – Ms. Zineb Bazza.
Action 5: for those countries in which there are black soil – to join the INBS. Contact person in the GSP
Secretariat – Mr. Yuxin Tong.
Action 6: for those countries in which there are salt-affected soils – to join the INSAS. Contact person in the
GSP Secretariat – Ms. Zineb Bazza.
Pillar 2: Encourage investment, technical cooperation, policy, education awareness and extension in soil.
Action 7: Interest in establishing the “Soil Doctors” Programme on promoting the establishment of a
farmer-to-farmer training system for CD of smallholder farmers on the practice of SSM in of EASP countries.
Contact person in the GSP Secretariat – Ms. Zineb Bazza.
Action 8: contribution of Soil Legislation information to country profiles of FAOLEX database. Inventory of
the country’s profile in the on national legislation, policies and agreements related to SSM. Updating the
database with such documents.
Action 9: Spread the voice on the existence of the SoilEx platform and use it to promote the
endorsement/review of soil-related national policies.
Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 8 and 9 – Ms. Natalia Rodriguez.
Pillar 3: Promote targeted soil research and development focusing on identified gaps, priorities and
synergies with related productive, environmental and social development actions.
Action 10: Assist the GSP Secretariat developing the Global Soil Research and Development (R&D) Platform.
Action 11: compiling data to feed the R&D platform.
Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 10 and 11 – Ms. Natalia Rodriguez.
Action 12: Experts on soils with high content of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) to contribute to regional chapters
of the report on identifying and compiling management practices and Land use strategies (LUS) that
promote the preservation and/or enhancement of SOC stocks.
Action 13: Develop/improve national SOC maps and participate in the Global assessment of soil organic
carbon sequestration potential (GSOCseq) Program.
Action 14: Promotion of more ambitious contributions at the national level, as well as including the soil in
the mechanism for trading greenhouse gas emission quotas.
Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 12, 13 и 14 – Ms. Rosa Cuevas.
Action 15: Respond to the questionnaire and participate in the regional workshops/discussions on the
assessment of the global status and regional trends of soil pollution. Contact person in the GSP Secretariat–
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez.
Action 16: Nominate country expert(s) on soil erosion. Contact person in the GSP Secretariat– Ms. Clara
Lefèvre
Pillar 4: Enhance the quantity and quality of soil data and information: data collection (generation),
analysis, validation, reporting, monitoring and integration with other disciplines.
National inputs in Global Soil Information System (GLOSIS)
Action 17: Update/develop SOCmap.
Action 18: Nominate expert(s) on soil salinity mapping.
Action 19: Initiate the procedure to develop country SIS – identify all relevant institutions in the country.
8
Contact persons in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 17, 18 и 19: Yusuf Yigini and Kostiantyn Viatkin.
Pillar 5: Harmonization of methods, measurements and indicators for the sustainable management and
protection of soil resources.
An active regional Pillar 5 WG is needed to support soil information system building and exchange of
harmonized data.
Action 20: nominate national reference laboratories.
Action 21: spread the voice on EUROSOLAN and support your national reference laboratories in establishing
National Soil Laboratory Networks.
Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 20 и 21 – Ms. Rosa Cuevas.
At the end of her report, Ms. Natalia Rodriguez noted that better communication between the GSP
Secretariat and the EASP Secretariat and with the NFPs needed to be informed of needs and progress.
Discussion.
In the discussion after the presentation by Ms. Natalia Rodriguez, particular attention was paid to the
process of creating the soil erosion map. Participants agreed that the primary task is to identify risk zones
and then develop separate maps for water and wind erosion depending on soil treatment. After the
meeting, recommendations will be adopted. Perhaps the next step will be to create a map of
recommended land reclamation activities.
Mr. Iurie Moshoi raised the question of how to map medium-eroded soils on slopes. It is still not clear what
is considered eroded soil, and what is underdeveloped? It was also noted the need to attract specialists in
the field of engineering hydrology and geohydrology to prepare actual recommendations on the removal
of water from the slopes in order to prevent erosion.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: the issue of erosion is too complex, a shortened profile is not only the result of
washing down, but also the result of xeromorphism. The extent of erosion is overestimated.
Mr. Arkadiy Levin brought up the question: if countries can count on financial support in translating
documents, such as the Fertilizer Code, into Ukrainian? Ms. Natalia Rodriguez replied that the translation of
the Fertilizer code into the national languages should be done by countries themselves, supposedly with
the involvement of commercial companies.
3 EASP Work Progress
3.1 General report on EASP results for 2018-2019 (Gulchekhra Khasanklhanova)
General report on activities and their results during 2018-2019 was presented by Chair of EASP
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova.
Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/session-2-general-report-gulchekhra-
khasankhanova (English).
First of all, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova reminded that the Eurasian subregional partnership includes 13
countries with significant experience in soil science. In 2017, the 4th Plenary meeting of the EASP was held
in Tashkent, in which representatives of 12 countries participated (all partnership countries, with the
exception of Turkmenistan) and the results of work for 2016-2017 were discussed. Following the meeting,
the Tashkent Communiqué and the updated RIP for 2018-2019 were adopted.
Further, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova presented the results of the activities for the five Pillars, carried
out in accordance with the RIP renewed in Tashkent and the road map outlined there.
9
Over the past two years, much work has been done for CD and strengthen regional cooperation. Its main
results were:
1. Report on barriers to the implementation of SSM practices;
2. Review of national programs and legal documents aimed at implementing approaches and
technologies for SSM;
3. Analysis of the role of institutions in supporting and implementing long-term programs on SLM;
4. The selection of sites for testing and demonstrating best practices in SSM for local stakeholders
and decision makers.
The main results of the EASP on the 5 pillars.
Pillar 1:
• All countries are involved in activities and adhere to the recommendations of the VGSSM regarding
10 major threats to soils.
• Cooperation has been established or successful continued with international organizations and
development institutions such as the World Bank, GEF, German Society for International Cooperation
(GIZ). Countries participate in international conventions and programs: the UN Convention to Combat
Desertification (UNCCD), the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (UN CBD) and the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Turkey and Moldova are preparing national reports on the
neutral balance of land degradation (LDN), and national action plans to combat desertification have
been developed in Armenia, Belarus, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan. Work is planned under the second phase
of the Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM 2) project.
• A study of human capital in soil science in Central Asia and the South Caucasus was conducted with
the support of the World Bank (Taking Stock of Human Capital in Soil Science for Central Asia and the
South Caucasus, 2018).
Pillar 2:
• The Eurasian Soil Portal is functioning; brochures, posters, calendars and animated products have
been published, which contribute to raising awareness and spreading knowledge about soils.
• A book on SSM and a guideline on sustainable land management (SLM) practices for agricultural
universities in Central Asia are being prepared for publication together with ICARDA.
• A variety of activities were organized as part of the World Soil Day campaign.
Pillar 3:
• The first round of small research grants for the study of saline soils was carried out and the second
round of research and applied projects in the field of salt-affected soils and the management of saline
soils and SOC management was announced.
• Collaboration has been established with international research programs, such as CIRCASA under the
EU “Horizon-2020” Program.
• Active participation of EASP soil scientists in the projects of the Russian Foundation for Basic
Research (RFBR), the Russian Science Foundation (RSF), etc. Projects on land degradation economics
(ELD) have appeared in the subject of grants from the RFBR.
Pillar 4:
• The Eurasian Soil Information System (EASIS) has been created and integrated with a general
methodology and software.
10
• Under the leadership of the EASP Secretariat, national Soil Data Facilities (SDF) have been created in
Russia, Moldova, Belarus and Azerbaijan. This work has become effective thanks to the close
collaboration of the Secretariat with the NFPs.
• Capacity building for the introduction of digital soil mapping, saline soil management and SOC
mapping with the participation of the EASP and GSP secretariats.
• Trainings on soil data management were conducted.
Pillar 5:
• EASP countries harmonize terminology, standards and protocols around the world;
• EASP specialists were trained at the GSP workshop on harmonization of laboratory soil research methods
(GLOSOLAN) in Rome (October 31 to November 2, 2017), in order to facilitate the transfer of knowledge,
skills and CD of EASP institutions.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova noted in her report that many results have been achieved due to the fact
that the governments of the countries have realized the importance of SSM.
Discussion.
Mr. Nikolai Tsibulko: Is GSOC map activity ongoing now? Is it possible to get financing for this work for
Belarus? How to get additional financing? Making a map for the whole country for $ 2-3 thousand is not
possible. How can we get larger grants?
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: Ukraine received funding under the first grants of GSP. Belarus chose
another topic on the assessment of soil quality. Scientists should value the adaptation of new methods and
approaches by FAO; FAO is not a donor and it should not finance national projects. FAO will assist in
methodological support.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: international support is important for any country and institution. In Ukraine, 43
million hectares of agricultural land. A map with a 1*1 km grid is not suitable for monitoring changes in
carbon content; maps of larger scales are needed.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: we need to rely more on the role of national governments. For example,
when Uzbekistan submits an application to the UNFCCC Adaptation Fund, the state contribution to the
project is 50%. World Bank conducts investment programs, but they do not show examples in certain
regions, do not finance the whole country.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: All studies in soil science require large investments, and it is obvious that no
international organization will take on funding. Our task, as partners, is to convince our governments. FAO
provides only methodological support or support for some case studies. You need to rely on your strength
and coordinate efforts. The GSP Secretariat receives a small amount of funds from FAO itself, but this is not
funding the Secretariat as a structure, it is a program to support a limited number of organizational
activities. Our activities are supported by special funds of the Russian Federation, they must be directed to
support very specific projects for the development of certain areas, for example, the creation of a soil
information system or harmonization of laboratories.
It is also necessary to consider and more actively use the opportunities of support from corporations. So,
PhosAgro sponsored the GLOSOLAN meeting. Small grants are an incentive for the development of certain
areas.
Among international funds, the GEF provides the most significant funds. The receipt and implementation of
a GEF grant is a rather complicated mechanism, and often there is a struggle between national
11
departments for the distribution of these funds. The Global Soil Carbon Map project was supported by the
Melinda Gates Foundation, including due to the support of African countries. We have a unique region with
good human potential, a strong school and traditions of soil science and a general educational level of the
population, as well as the experience of long-terms activity of agrochemical services. Therefore, we are in a
winning position, but we must work, first of all, with the country's government.
Mr. Iurie Moshoi: Concerning fundraising. Since Moldova joined the activities of the EASP 3-4 years ago, we
have been eating to establish communication with the government, but it doesn’t work out very well.. But
the last 2 years we have been working on case studies. We found interesting responsiveness on the part of
companies and agricultural holdings, for example, Uralchem and the Quality platform. We have an erosion
research station, and we work closely with them.
In the current state of things, it is possible to train specialists in Moldova only in partnership with the
Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo.
After the report of Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova, the heads of directions presented in more detail the
results of activities for each Pillar for 2018-2019.
3.1.1 Work Progress on Pillar 1 (Hakki Erdogan)
Презентация: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-meeting-session-2-pillar-1-report-by-
hakki-emrah-erdogan (на английском языке).
Mr. Hakki Erdogan emphasized at the beginning of his report that during the formation of the Pillars of the
GSP, it was suggested that the activities of all the pillars would be aimed mainly at the implementation of
Pillar 1. Thus, the implementation of SSM is the main activity in the RIP of the EASP.
As part of the FAO Technical Cooperation Program, a Country Action Plan on SSM in Turkey was prepared in
2019.
The main task for the EASP countries in the area of implementation of SSM is the search for financing. GEF
colleagues at FAO will talk more about GEF mechanisms and the benefits of applying from several
countries. Below I will talk about working on an application for a joint project that will be overseen by
Turkey.. At the time of the meeting, a concept note and a proposal were prepared.
3.1.2 Work Progress on Pillar 2 (Elena Sukhacheva)
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-2-activities-223461961 (English).
The information search and analysis on various programs and projects showed that in 2018-2019 there
were more activities to strengthen cooperation and disseminate knowledge in the field of soil science than
during the last stage (2016-2017). Perhaps this is due to the increase in activity after the campaign of the
International Year of Soils.
• The World Bank supported ECFS project on Taking Stock of Human Capital in Soil Science for
Central Asia and the South Caucasus (2018).
• “Strengthening Agricultural Infrastructure Services with the Context of Global Soil Partnership”
Project under FAO-Turkey Partnership Programme (March 2018).
• GEF and FAO started in 2018 large soil project “Integrated Natural Resources Management in
Degraded Landscapes in the Forest-Steppe and Steppe Zones of Ukraine”.
• Program of the Agriculture and rural communities of the European neighborhood development is
being implemented in Armenia
12
The report listed also the main international scientific and applied conferences and seminars held in the
EASP countries, including:
• 10th International Congress “Environment and Soil Resources Conservation” (Almaata, Kazakhstan,
October 17-19, 2018);
• Seminar of School of Conservative Agriculture at the Experimental Station of the Institute of
Pedology, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection "Nicolae Dimo", Ivancea, September 28, 2018,
• Conference «Increasing of soil fertility and application of fertilizers» took place in the Institute of
Soil Science and Agrochemistry (Minsk, 14th of February, 2019).
• Field Day in Kharkiv, Ukraine, 2019;
• Conferences in Russia: V.V Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, Southern Federal University, MSU,
Kuban State Agrarian University, Vyatka state agricultural academy and many others.
Conferences and schools for young scientists were held: Minsk, Moscow (Russian State Agrarian University
- Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy, MSU), St. Petersburg (Central Museum of Soil Science named
after V.V. Dokuchaev).
Once again, Ms. Elena Sukhacheva emphasized the importance of informing politicians of the need to
support soil knowledge dissemination.
A variety of activities in the framework of the World Soil Day campaign took place in many EASP countries.
On a special way WSD was celebrated in Russia (in Moscow and St. Petersburg), where the ECFS, with the
support of the World Bank and the FAO Liaison Office for the Russian Federation, has been conducting the
International Scientific and Practical Conference on Food Security and Soil Science for 4 years in a row,
together with leading organizations in the field of soil science (above 100 people participate annually,
including representatives from Asia, Africa, North America). Ms. Elena Sukhacheva announced the
conference in Sochi.
Ms. Elena Sukhacheva noted in her report a lack of information in the Internet about activities in the field
of soil science, despite the large number of events held in the EASP countries.
A suggestion was made to step up efforts to promote knowledge on soils through the mass media and the
dissemination of information on the Internet. The need to engage new stakeholders and attract
commercial and non-profit organizations to strengthen technical cooperation and raise awareness on SSM
was also emphasized.
3.1.3 Work Progress on Pillar 3 (Svyatoslav Baliuk)
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-3-activities (Russian).
Information on practically oriented research was requested from each EASP country, however, only
Armenia, Russia and Ukraine provided lists of projects. Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk noted the need to intensify
efforts to collect information.
Two rounds of small research grants. Following the results of the first round devoted to the study of salt-
affected soils, projects were selected and implemented in 5 EASP countries - Armenia, Belarus, Moldova,
Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Best articles on the results of small projects in Ukraine, Armenia and Belarus were
published in the journal Soil Science.
The second round (just announced at the time of the meeting) is dedicated to research and applied projects
in the field of soil salinity, assessment of the quality and monitoring of salt-affected soils, and management
of SOC.
13
Particularly important studies are conducted in Armenia in the field of improving the reclamation state of
the soils of the Ararat Valley in connection with a decrease in the groundwater level. Recommendations on
improving the use of water resources are given.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk drew particular attention in his report to the high interest in the interdisciplinary
competition of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research "Fundamental problems of soil research and soil
management in Russia". The competition received 266 applications, of which 46 projects were
recommended for financing a total amount of 600 million rubles for three years of project implementation
(≈10 million dollars). Projects are carried out in the following sections:
• The impact of global and regional climate change on the state of Eurasian soils in the past, present
and future
• Mechanisms of stabilization of soil organic matter at the molecular and ecosystem levels
• Technogenic and agrogenic soil pollution
• Creation of improved and artificial soils
• Study of the microbiome and metagenome of Russian soils as the basis for effective agriculture and
soil protection
• Digital farming, soil information systems, remote and geophysical methods for the study of soils
and soil cover
• ELD.
Also in Russia, an extensive list of research topics is presented: from soil biome research to innovative
developments in the use of drones. The studies are carried out as part of academic programs, federal
targeted programs, projects of the Innovation Promotion Fund, the Skolkovo Foundation and others.
Such topics as ELD and the legal framework for the soil protection have good prospects for developing.
There are examples of litigations on the soil protection and reclamation issues. Mr. Svyatosav Baliuk gave
an example of France, where from every ton of crop production a certain percentage is transferred for
researches.
Ukraine is implementing a project for the development and use of organic-mineral fertilizers. According to
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk, this area is especially promising for SOC managing in Central Asia.
Soil mapping of the Danube river basin was carried out according to the SOTER method on a scale of 1:
250,000. The biggest problem is the coordination of the results obtained in the border areas.
In Ukraine, within the framework of the research program of the National Academy of Agricultural
Sciences, a research line “Soil Resources of Ukraine” has been created, in which 25 organizations
participate. Development of contaminated soils and other applied research.
Activities under the UNCCD. With the participation of the Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry
named after O.N. Sokolovsky developed a national action plan to achieve neutral degradation, approved by
the Cabinet of Ministers. One of the points of the plan is the stabilization of the content of organic matter
in the soil and its increase by 0.1% by 2030. A special issue is implementation monitoring using the
GSOCmap card and remote sensing.
Together with specialists from the Netherlands, Ukraine is working to promote methods of spectrometry
and plant nutrition diagnostics (Soil Cares Research Company).
Work is underway to create a National Soil Partnership.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk noted that work should be intensified to provide the results of research on the state
of soil resources for politicians.
14
Discussion.
Mr. Nikolay Tsybulko. How is it planned to increase SOC content by 0.1% by 2030?
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: How consistent are the figures with the “4 per 1000” initiative? The richer the soil
with carbon, the more difficult it is to build up reserves. When reclamating soils with a low content, it is
quite easy to significantly increase its content. Is Ukraine officially included in the 4 ppm program? Without
increasing the amount of organic fertilizers used, it is impossible. Can animal husbandry provide this? Are
you planning to use other methods, for example biochar?
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: Ukraine has not yet entered the “4 per 1000” initiative. In 1990 Ukraine firstly start
the programme of reproduction of soil fertility: they applied 8 t / ha of organic fertilizers, 150 kg / ha of the
active substance NPK, 1.5 million ha were limed. In 1990, the livestock number was 25 million heads, now 4
million. Now in Ukraine, a livestock development program has been drawn up, but there is still no manure.
Poultry farming is developing effectively. However, before restoration of at least half of the cattle
population to ensure the necessary amount of organic fertilizers, the restoration of carbon content in soils
is possible only by changing the crop rotation system. The main issue is the establishment of a relationship
between land users and the state, which was lost after the collapse of the USSR.
Proposal from the participants: It is necessary to focus on green fertilizers (legumes winter + vetch). Solve
the issue of seed base.
3.1.4 Work Progress on Pillar 4 (Oleg Golozubov)
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-4-activities (Russian).
Mr. Oleg Golozubov noted that the Pillar 4 WG is always in close cooperation with the Pillar 5 WG.
Over the past two years, much attention has been paid to the development of technical education, the
holding of practical seminars in the EASP countries and Russia. Mr. Oleg Golozubov presented a program of
courses on working with soil information. The courses were approved as a supplementary education
program, and certificates are given to successful participants. Among the key issues addressed in these
courses:
• Regional analogues of standards of the SQ ISO 28258 series - design and object models.
• Description scheme and Cookbook for setting standards
• Organization of the exchange of soil information in the international network of national soil
institutes;
• Typical information infrastructure of a regional SDFs;
• Methods of accumulation and storage of soil information and solving problems of harmonization of
soil data and others.
A training seminar on SIS and databases was conducted. The event was held by the staff of the ECFS I.O.
Alyabina and O.M. Golozubov on the basis of the Kyrgyz National Agrarian University named after
K.I. Scriabin (June 3-8, 2018).
In addition to the seminars, active work was carried out to determine the information richness of various
organizations.
A Country SIS Survey questionnaire was prepared and sent to the GSP Secretariat (about 60 questions)
regarding the readiness of GSP countries to create national SDFs. Information from SDFs in the Russian
Federation (agrochemical centers Rostov, Belgorod, Moscow, and data center of the Southern Federal
University) has been preliminarily collected.
15
For example, it became clear that in Kyrgyzstan the agrochemical station has the most actual and regular
information, and the Kyrgyz Research Agriculture Institute has the largest data archive. In 2018, after the
seminar on creating a SDF, four Kyrgyz organizations submitted an application to the Ministry of
Agriculture.
In Tashkent, on the basis of UZGIP, a SDF server with dedicated IP and remote access and work places for
GIS department specialists were deployed and primary information (maps, tables and statements of
agrochemical and land reclamation surveys) was collected.
The collaboration with colleagues from Moldova and Azerbaijan resulted in a multilingual (Russian, English,
Romanian, Azerbaijani) metadata database, an object model, and a software package for standardizing and
exchanging soil information Soil_ML_MiltyL. This software package is designed to create a structured
description of soils both by independent researchers for solving copyright problems, and by government
agencies - agrochemical centers, laboratories, expert organizations - for agricultural monitoring. The
software package was registered with the Joint Fund for Electronic Resources “Science and Education” of
the Russian Federation (July 7, 2019).
Mr. Oleg Golozubov handed the certificate to one of the authors of the standard – Mr. Iurii Rozloga.
At the end of the report, Mr. Oleg Golozubov outlined the key areas in which work will continue on Pillar 4,
and also discussed the issue of creating a two-level standard for the collection, storage and exchange of soil
information. Years of experience in organizing SDFs have shown that it is difficult for EASP countries to
switch directly to an international standard. Therefore, the meetings of the WG discussed the idea of
creating a country standard first, and then the transition to an international standard. Thus, it is planned to
operate in the GLOSIS system.
It is necessary to unite organizations at the level of interagency cooperation, since not a single organization,
not a single ministry has the entirety of soil data.
Mr. Oleg Golozubov noted at the end of the report: We are ready to disseminate the experience of
organizing interagency and territorial cooperation accumulated in Russia.
3.1.5 Work Progress on Pillar 5 (Hukmatullo Akhmadov)
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-5-activities (Russian).
Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov noted that he also (as Mr. Baliuk) encountered a problem in collecting
information on the activities of the Pillar by country, as letters were left unanswered.
Until now, there is no agreement between the EASP countries in the terminology, methods and approaches
to the collection and processing of data, which makes it difficult to work in other Pillars. The
implementation of the other pillars depends on the most technical Pillar 5. At the same time, Mr.
Humkatullo noted that harmonization of methods at the regional level can be quite dangerous, because it
can lead to the development of regional systems that are different from each other and are inconsistent
with each other. Thus, at the regional and subregional level, an effort is needed to implement harmonized
approaches.
Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov made a special emphasis on the work in the field of harmonization of methods
for assessing and managing salt-affected soils. ECFS case studies featured cases on salt-affected soils.
Seminars and conferences on soil salinity were held.
The regional network of laboratories was created for harmonizing soil research. A system of interstate
standards for salt-affected and solonetzic soils, including the development of standards for sampling soils,
should be agreed upon.
16
Mr. Hukmatullo outlined the main activities for the Pillar, including activities within the framework of
GLOSOLAN. He also dwelled on the need to determine the criteria for soil degradation. Especially in
mountainous areas, where it is difficult to distinguish which soils are underdeveloped and which are
degraded. In these areas, one wrong step can lead to the destruction of the soil profile.
3.2 Interactions with the ESP to establish an effective RESOLAN (Hakki Erdogan)
Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-meeting-session-2-eurosolan-activities-
by-hakki-emrah-erdogan (English).
Mr. Hakki Erdogan presented in detail the results of the ESP activities on Pillar 5. European soil laboratories
are united in a strong network and have extensive experience in cooperation and data harmonization.
Mr Hakki Erdogan talked about working with a partnership to establish a regional network of soil
laboratories (RESOLAN).
Harmonization of soil policies. Implementation plan includes actions on mapping, classification,
laboratories, procedures, soil information, indicators. These actions will allow the harmonization of
information. There is a list of laboratories responsible by country. There are 6 accredited laboratories in
Eurasian region. In Europe, much more. The main thing is that information is available to everyone on the
network. Efficiency: There is already data that is very helpful and can contribute to the development of the
network. There are policies regarding soil testing; there is high quality data. Opportunities in Europe. This
network is a good opportunity for data exchange between two regions - Europe and the Eurasian region.
Mr Hakki Erdogan presented the GLOSOLAN technical working group and it’s main tasks:
• Make soil analytical information comparable and interpretable between laboratories, countries,
and regions;
• Create a set of harmonized principles for harmonization;
• Improving quality assurance and control of soil analyzes;
• Facilitate the exchange of information and experience.
Examples of existing knowledge and experience in Europe were given, such as the EC LUCAS program,
standardization of soil laboratories according to the ISO system, high-quality and long-term soil analyzes
within the framework of the EC Common Agricultural Policy (EU CAP) program.
The creation of RESOLAN is an opportunity for the exchange of knowledge and experience between the EPP
and EASP member countries.
Discussion.
Svyatoslav Baliuk: What current work is going in the field of creating standard samples - an integral part of
the reference base?
Mr. Hakki Erdogan: Some laboratories have begun a ring test.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: can standard samples really be standard? They need an expensive 3 year preparation,
including conducting multiple independent analyzes in different laboratories.
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: the idea is that the first control tests showed that there were significant discrepancy
in results, that it is impossible to get the same result in different countries. Due to their high cost, they
were not standardized to ISO. GLOSOLAN partners must decide whether reference materials are useful or
not.
Mr. Iurie Moshoy: samples of soil subtypes were preserved for 25 years. There is another way for the
laboratories to work according to one method: to collect a sample of typical Chernozem, for example, and
17
conduct analyses in 50 laboratories. At EASP, we must have at least 10 accredited laboratories in order to
create these samples.
Mr. HukmatulloAkhmadov: first, the classification of soils needs to be unified.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: few laboratories in Russia expressed a desire to participate EUROSOLAN. They ask
why this is necessary? The system of reference materials already exists and is functioning. The laboratory
asks why duplicate? We suggest expanding the range of indicators. The laboratories asked the Ministry of
Agriculture to lower the order, and the Ministry of Agriculture asked to bring letters from these
laboratories that they want to participate in this standardization. Intra-agency barriers make work difficult.
Oleg Golozubov: the 5th pillar was originally devoted to harmonization, as providing a unified semantic
model, a unified means for exchanging information. Almost all agrochemical laboratories (over 100) in
Russia are certified; the problem is that to ensure comparability, methods must be unified.
3.3 Results discussion
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: regarding laboratories, I strongly support the initiative to create RESOLAN.
A compromise must be found in order to obtain several laboratories accredited by international standards.
Only one laboratory in Uzbekistan received such accreditation with the help of Turkey for only 4 types of
analyzes. If there are 6-8 laboratories in the EASP, and we can get unified analyzes, we can adjust the
classification. Strong partners like Turkey can train. The integration of scientists and laboratories is needed.
You need to take a report point. The soil cover has changed a lot. It is necessary to study either several
types of soils on the same instruments, or one type in several accredited laboratories.
Mr. Iurie Moshoy: It is not necessary to make a reference with the classification. For example, carbonate
enriched samples are analyzed according to their own standards; an reference sample can be bought. We
should talk not about the accuracy of a particular method, but about the correctness of the determination
according to the international standard ISO / IEC 17025. This is not relevant to the classification. Five years
ago, European methods for the determination of nitrogen in laboratories in Chisinau were adopted. Now
we are expanding the scope of accreditation. At present, in Moldova, fertilizer control is well established.
Mr. George Zhigau: The “Russian Chernozem” V.V. Dokuchaev said that the data presented in it cannot be
used to assess changes in the content of organic matter. From 2003 to 2015, I headed the Republican
Agrochemical Service: all attempts to improve the situation fail.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov:
Pillar 5. Not so much attention was paid to the issue of harmonization of analytical methods for the
reporting period, we mostly followed by the GSP plan. First of all, we need to understand what objects we
work with, and to which group of objects we can extrapolate data. According to the USSR classification
(1977), for the study of Leached and Typical subtypes Cernozems, we must take two the samples, and
according to the FAO classification, this is one type of soil. At the moment, WRB remains the most
promising classification. On the basis of the museum, we should carry out a training seminar for WRB.
Pillar 4. The Secretariat represented by Oleg Golozubov does a lot, but I would like to see more results at
the country level. Currently, there are SDFs in Moldova, Belarus, Russia and Uzbekistan, but they do not
provide results.
Mr. Oleg Golozubov: there is experience and the presence of initiative groups. A big request to participants
of this meeting not to send directors and administrative staff to the upcoming meeting on Pillars 4 and 5 in
Rome, but to send technical specialists.
18
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: the whole initiative should come from partners. Not all countries have bilateral
interaction. It would be useful to involve Turkish specialists in the training and transfer of experience in
Georgia and Ukraine, for example. A lot of requests from national specialists for training.
Mr. Oleg Golozubov: several departments in the Russian Federation have already been merged.
Agrochemical centers need 1-2 months to make 500 cadastral passports of fertility. If you have a data
center, 3000 passports can be generated automatically in an hour.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: GSP arose around the idea of a common information system.
Pillar 3. Countries are unevenly represented. Only Armenia and Russia sent information. The Scientific
Council at the RAS should collect this information, but this work is not ongoing.
Pillar 2. A museum is the best place to promote scientific knowledge. But Pillar 2 is not only about the
promotion of knowledge, but also about attracting investment and education. It is necessary to review the
curricula. It is also necessary to intensify activities for the conduct of continuing education courses, the
creation of consulting services.
I emphasize once again that all the Pillars are connected to each other.
Pillar 1. The most important, since everything else is needed for the SSM, to reduce degradation. In order to
put this into practice, a great deal of political will and resources are needed. The reports of work progress
show that insufficient efforts are being made.
In general, today's reports have identified a large number of gaps, that should become in the focus of
action for the next period.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: according to Pillar 1 there are problems, but what is being done on the
rest is the contribution to the Pillar 1. Turkey have been working hard and received the GEF project. Pillar 2:
all countries help in the preparation of price reporting. It requires reporting by target groups. But indicators
are not everywhere. It is necessary to monitor the organization of trainings and courses. Pillar 3 and 4 -
require contributions from participating countries.
Mr. Iurie Moshoy commented on Pillar 2 about land law. In Moldova, the Land Code cannot be approved;
the Law on Soils has not been approved since 1990. For example, the law prohibitive the irrigation of
Chernozem with water with a salinity of more than 1 g/l has is not adopted for a long time. It is necessary
to adopt the experience of other countries in the development of legislation.
Ms. Elena Sukhacheva: we are trying to adopt a law on the protection of soils in St. Petersburg. However,
we are faced with obstacles, as we intrude in the field of interests of builders. Pillar 5. I support the spread
of WRB based on the museum's collection. We can also continue the selection of monoliths for monitoring -
this will be an invaluable contribution for our future generations.
Mr. Maxim Dabakhov: regarding the law on soil protection. We have a sufficient normative base. There is a
methodology for assessing environmental damage. The Russian Federal Service for Veterinary and
Phytosanitary Surveillance uses these techniques. Soil disturbance during construction activity can be
tracked and punished with the help of GOSTs for control and reclamation.
4 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 discussion
The EASP Secretariat prepared for the meeting in Chisinau a draft of the EASP RIP for 2020-2023 in the form
of a table with the main planned results, actions to achieve them, the responsible executors, timelines and
the preliminary budget. The RIP was based on a work plan for each of the five Pillars, developed by the GSP
and approved by the Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils (ITPS). When drawing up the plan, the
19
Secretariat proceeded from the experience of the previous stage, the results achieved, the ongoing projects
and the capabilities of the EASP.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov invited those present to discuss in what types of activities presented at the beginning
of the meeting by Mr. Natalia Rodriguez in the report on the GSP activities to develop regional interests,
the EASP members can participate, and with what resources this will be carried out.
Ms. Maria Konyushkova opened the discussion as one of the 27 experts of the ITPS, which determines the
scientific policy of the GSP. Ms. Maria Konyushkova noted that all global initiatives in the regions face their
own specific barriers and are acquiring regional priorities. I expressed gratitude to Mr. Hakki Erdogan, who
took the initiative to prepare a regional joint application for a GEF grant. Ms. Maria Konyushkova suggested
discussing with NFPs the possibility of integrating efforts and including in the RIP activities for preparing an
application to the GEF and, if funds are received, implementation project work.
The representative of the EASP Secretariat, Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva, presented to the audience a draft of
the RIP item by item and made additions and corrections proposed by the participants.
Comments on Pillar 1.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk offered to plan two publications on SSM: one on theoretical issues, and the second - a
guide for practitioners. Ukraine would like to continue work in the field of disseminating the principles of
the Fertilizer code, as Ukrainian experts took an active part in its development, a large department for
agrochemical research operates in the Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after
A.N. Sokolovskiy. We prepared carbon stabilization proposals and are also ready to actively participate in
work on SOM management in the future.
Mr. Maxim Dabakhov recommended that the Russian federal state professional standard, soil scientist-
ecologist-agrochemist, be taken into account when developing a training course on SSM.
Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov suggested using the WOCAT database and not creating a regional knowledge
base on SSM, as suggested by the Secretariat. He emphasized that in recent years, WOCAT has greatly
simplified the questionnaire on the inclusion of practices.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov explained that the Secretariat had begun work on creating a knowledge base on SSM
in temperate areas, following the example of the TempAg initiative.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova suggested including in the RIP the creation of national soil partnerships as
a result, and the first activity to achieve this result should be the identification of interested individuals and
organizations.
Regarding the knowledge base, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova proposed systematizing agro-landscape
projects taking into account land use and climatic conditions, as well as providing information on the
economic assessment of SLM technologies.
Ms. Elena Sukhacheva supported the idea and drew attention to the need to focus on farmers.
Mr. Samvel Sahakyan expressed doubts about the need to create national partnerships, taking into account
the existence of the Society of Soil Scientists.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov explained that the members of the Society of Soil Scientists are individual scientists,
professionals in a narrow research field who discuss mainly scientific issues, and the partnership does not
provide for individual membership. The purpose of the partnerships is the conservation of soil resources by
the joint efforts of various interested organizations - environmental NGOs, government departments,
20
business representatives, the food industry, i.e. all organizations interested in soil quality and increasing
soil productivity.
Comments on Pillar 2
Participants made a number of comments on the use of terminology in the field of regulatory
documentation.
It was decided to plan efforts to ensure the legal creation of advisory services and draw on the experience
of existing advisory services in Ukraine and Uzbekistan. In Uzbekistan, a extension service based in the
Tashkent State Agrarian University disseminates experience in greenhouses, freezers, fruit dryers, which
were deployed with the help of international donors. A government decree was issued to create advisory
services on the basis of all agricultural universities.
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: the GSP plan includes the creation of training materials for different categories of
students in the framework of the EgSoils program.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk proposed the creation of regional educational and scientific centers on soil
protection.
Comments on Pillar 3.
Ms. Maria Konyushkova proposed expanding the scope of applied research from salinization and SOC
management to the 10 main soil threats identified in the VGSSM (soil erosion, loss of soil biodiversity and
others).
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez supported this idea, and recommended to relocate of INBS activities to Pillar 1.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk proposed to conduct research in the field of not only the economic efficiency of
introducing SSM practices, but on the integrated environmental-economic assessment. In Ukraine in the
field of soil erosion there is no official monitoring, no service currently does not monitor runoff and
washout of the topsoil. Also, Ukraine is waiting for proposals by the INBS to give special status to black
soils, which are degrading at an accelerated pace.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: regarding the Atlas of Asian Soils, very few materials have been received so far.
Armenia was the first to provide the text. The preparation of the text and illustrations will take about two
more years. To publish the soil map of the RSFSR (V.M. Fridland, 1988), draft versions of the maps of
Central Asia and the South Caucasus were prepared. Subsequently, they were finalized at the V.V.
Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, presented to the FAO, and now it remains to clarify the classification and
align the map along the border with other maps.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: in addition to conducting applied research on 10 threats, we need to turn
our activities towards mitigating the effects of climate change. If the climate change is taken into account in
the map set, then we will be able to cooperate with international climate initiatives and participate in GEF
climate projects.
Comments on Pillar 4.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: in Ukraine, a lot of organizational work has been done to create a SDF on the basis of
the Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovsky, there is a resolution of the
National Academy of Agricultural Sciences.
Regarding salinization, I support the idea of creating an INSAS.
21
Mr. Oleg Golozubov: for each map (salinization, sequestration, erosion), it is necessary to determine the
responsible specialists from the countries as soon as possible). Each country can and should have several
SDFs.
The essence of Pillar 5 is the dissemination of knowledge of the standardized soil description language ML
in close connection with Pillar 4. A technical description of soil data is required.
Comments on Pillar 5.
Mr. Arkady Levin: the creation of correlation tables is necessary.
Mr. Umid Abdullaev: there are big problems with the lack of knowledge of English by young specialists.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: for the conversion of soil information into a digital format and the
successful functioning of SDFs, young specialists with soil education who can operate GIS programs and
preferably with knowledge of English are needed.
General comments throughout the Work plan.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: Our research and development should fit into the plans for economic and social
development of the regions and land management plans. In Soviet times, each field had its own technical
passport. After land reforms and significant fragmentation, these passports are no longer valid and need to
be updated. It was noted that we have great prospects in creating extension services and data centers
based on agrochemical services.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: it is necessary to more actively use international modelling tools in the
field of soil potential in various economic and climatic scenarios.
All comments were recorded and the full text of the RIR will be posted on the EASP page on the FAO
website and sent to the NFPs.
5 GEF and SSM – preparation of regional project
Г-н Эрнан Гонзалес, представил краткий доклад о механизмах распределения средств ГЭФ на
проекты в области УУПР в рамках реализации Конвенций ООН по окружающей среде.
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/exploring-options-for-financing-sustainable-soil-
management-and-the-gef (English).
Currently, the GEF is implementing the seventh stage of financing (GEF-7), in which the countries of the
Eurasian region have already partially spent funds. In each country, the GEF national coordinator decides
which of the following areas — land degradation, climate change, biodiversity, chemical pollutants — can
be used. Mr. Hernan Gonzales outlined the topics of SSM projects in the framework of these areas, and
cited data as of September 27, 2019 on the balance of funds for projects in the area of land degradation.
The benefits of preparing a regional project were discussed. The GEF prefers to include SLM in selected
country projects that support the achievement of a neutral balance of land degradation (LDN).
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: The more the government invests, the more the GEF will increase the next
amount. How related are the projects related to the forest and the achievement of the LDN? LDN is a
landscape approach. In Bukhara in particular, there is a great need for the establishment of forest shelter
belts. But for the forest project, forest belts are also important. Who will benefit?
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov asked Mr. Hakki Erdogan to talk about the planned GEF regional project and explain
what are the requirements for partnership on the contribution to the project application?
22
Mr. Hakki Erdogan presented a progress report on the preparation of a regional grant / project application
GEF7 titled «Conduct the balance between conservation and use of the soil resources in Eurasian agro-
production landscapes».
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/discussion-of-the-gef7-regional-project-on-conduct-
the-balance-between-conservation-and-use-of-the-soil-resources-in-eurasian (English)
The aim of the project is to improve human wellbeing and environmental resilience through the
implementation of SSM and ensuring an enabling clean environment in the Eurasian region. Turkey has
prepared the first draft of the application by the time of the meeting.
Such regional project is needed to facilitate the implementation of the EASP RPR, establish synergies in soil
policies at the regional level, develop joint actions to solve a common problem (loss of soil ecosystem
functions), strengthen regional capacities and infrastructure to improve best practices in SSM to ensure
sustainable agriculture.
The main differences from other ongoing projects in the region are that they do not include all the
components related to soil management, such as the assessment of soil pollution, soil biodiversity, and
overall ecosystem functions of soils. The project proposes five results that intersect with the EASP RIR.
Mr. Hakki Erdogan announced the preliminary project budget in four areas: “land degradation”, “climate
change”, “biodiversity”, “chemical pollutants”. Turkey approved a mobilization of a total of 220,000 US
dollars from the GEF. Mr. Hakki Erdogan called for a discussion on the possibility of raising government
funds.
Discussion of the GEF Project
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: how much does this project overlap with current projects (a question for Mr. Hakki
Erdogan) and how great are the chances that the project will be supported?
Mr. Hakki Erdogan: it should be different from current activities, so we focus more on soil pollution, soil
biodiversity, and we should focus on developing a common soil management policy, and we need to
brainstorm during this meeting to find answers to this question.
Mr. Hernan Gonzales: as I have already mentioned, money is distributed between countries. If countries
want to invest in this project, they can. Ambition is high. We are talking about 2.5 million dollars between
13 countries. The region already has a large portfolio of international projects "on the ground". If this is
interesting to countries, we can organize a discussion at the GEF.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: can the GEF organize support for the EASP in its key areas of activity in
reaching out to other donors? If one of the results is the strengthening of the infrastructure, the technical
component (for example, the creation of laboratories), then this can be financed by the Adaptation Fund or
the Green Economy, but under the auspices of the GEF, so that there is an environmental component?
Mr. Hernan Gonzales: The GEF is not a quick fund, it is a long expensive process. It is necessary to move
gradually, to see which funds are available in which countries and in which thematic areas.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk said that Ukraine is ready to support this project.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: If 2-3 countries now support this project, the GEF will allocate an
additional $ 2 million for regional work. In, GEF funds remained only for the “climate” direction. The GEF
Climate Change focal point in Uzbekistan should study this project.
There is a negative experience with a large donor. There were problems with the CACILM project due to the
fact that local people do not always do their job fairly. We wanted to demonstrate our results on the
23
example of a small project, and when it was necessary to move on to a large project, the leadership
changed, and the project went to another department. There should be rules from donors who will carry
out the work on the project, which department. FAO technical support is need.
Mr. Ronald Vargas: we must do our best to make this project a reality. Implementing as many projects as
possible is our basic principle for implementing SLM.
It was decided that representatives of Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan contact the GEF
representatives in their countries and interact with Mr. Hakki Erdogan to prepare the application. It is
recommended to correct the project title.
It was decided to include in the RIP a separate paragraph the preparation of this project.
6 Relevant national and global initiatives
6.1 National activities
NFPs briefly presented key activities in the area of SLM in countries.
Armenia (Mr. Samvel Sahakyan). In the first half of 2019, a discussion began on a project under the
auspices of the GSP on the creation of the Armenian SIS. The Minister of Agriculture signed this project. The
following organizations are included in the project activity: the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of
Armenia, which now includes the Ministry of Agriculture, the Institute of Geodesy and Cartography
(provides cartographic data and technologies), the National Agrarian University of Armenia represented by
its unit - the Scientific Center for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Land Reclamation named after
H. Petrosyan, CJSC “Melioration” (provides data on the status of groundwater and studies of saline soils),
agrochemical services (each year about 35,000 soil analyses for NPK, humus and other agrochemical
parameters). The GSP delegation led by Mr. Ronald Vargas visited these organizations and enlisted their
support in providing data for the creation of a national SIS. As part of the Pillar 5 activities, we attracted a
laboratory from Yerevan to participate here in Chisinau at the EUROSOLAN meeting and in further
harmonization activities.
Armenia was the only country that actively carried out the reclamation and use of soda saline soils, 5
thousand hectares of such soils were reclaimed. However, after the collapse of the USSR, funds were not
enough for practical development. Meliorants were received mainly from Russia and Ukraine. But
theoretical research continues to evolve. A non-contact reclamation method using sulfur dioxide was
created. However, while this is not economically viable, it is cheaper to use non-saline soils.
Russia (Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov). Despite the fact that Russia is a donor to the GSP, we have problems in the
activities of the EASP. As in other countries, we have a big problem with NFPs that are constantly changing,
and do not respond to requests from the Secretariat of the GSP. Therefore, I am acting as deputy NFP. In
many ways, the situation with financing soil work is much better than in other countries. We managed to
draw attention to soil problems. We are especially proud that we managed to organize an interdisciplinary
concurs of the RFBR on soils, but only 3 million euros were allocated for all projects. Moreover, the
competition was very large, more than 5 applications for a place, so we could not support everyone. Many
applications were submitted not by soil scientists, for example, developers of drones. This suggests that
understanding of the important role of soils has reached a large number of different specialists. So far, it
has not been possible to organize international regional projects.
Specialized institutions continue to operate: V.V. Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, Institute of
Agrochemistry named after D.N. Pryanishnikov of RAS, Institute of Physical, Chemical and Biological
24
Problems of Soil Science of RAS, Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry of the Siberian Branch of RAS,
institutes in Ulan-Ude, Vladivostok and soil scientists at universities in Rostov-on-Don, Tomsk and many
other cities. Actively working the V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science.
There are problems with education, since the Ministry of Science and Higher Education is on the path to
formalizing training programs and documents related to the educational sphere. Educational standards are
tied to professional standards as much as possible. As Mr. Maxim Dabakhov said, to date, a professional
standard “soil scientist” has been developed.
Interaction is being established with representatives of business and NGOs. For example, cooperation is
ongoing with the National Conservation Agriculture Movement (Mrs. Anna Kontoboytseva of the
Secretariat is responsible). In particular, this organization owned the idea of creating a database on SLM.
Regarding activities to harmonize soil laboratories within the framework of Pillar 5, there is still resistance
from the laboratories, negotiations are ongoing. According to WRB classification, no new steps have been
taken so far. The main problems are associated with difficulties in interacting with authorities and weak
interactions at the institutional level. There are problems of competition and parallel research.
Question from Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: how much does the current paradigm determined in relation to soil
formation correspond to the spirit of the times?
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: Factors-processes-properties-functions of soils (ecosystem services) remain the main
issues, and new directions should be more interdisciplinary. It is necessary to study the economic, social
aspects of SSM, issues of healthy nutrition.
Tajikistan (Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov). The same situation as in Russia, NFP also did not come, I fulfill his
duties. The scientific topics of the Institute of Soil Science coincide with the Pillars. Work is underway to
create a database of soil descriptions. The employee studied in India, but the work is very difficult, there is
not enough software and hardware.
The first major topic of Institute’s work is erosion processes (assessment methods, soil washout). We study
how erosion affects the humus horizon of mountain soils. During the USSR, a good map of soil erosion of
Tajikistan was made, which entered the Atlas of 54 maps based on satellite images. From time to time, we
make soil pits in the long-term field stations and update this map.
The second important topic is the study of salt-affected soils. Work continues on the reclamation of salt-
affected soils in the Vakhsh valley. The third important topic is the biologization of agriculture.
The main problems with financing and personnel. We send our bachelors to Novosibirsk and Kursk
(Institute for the Protection of Soils from Erosion), where they study at the expense of Russia.
Every year we hold World Soil Day at the Institute of Soil Science, we invite everyone. We do Doors Open
Days for students. By order of the Government, we hold conferences on soil erosion, salinization,
classification and soil genesis. Actively working with India on GIS technology.
Turkey (Mr. Hakki Erdogan). Over the past two years, the main activity has been carried out as part of the
FAO-Turkey Cooperation Program. We have developed a national action plan for SSM and the creation of
the SIS. Due to the large number of different institutions with a large amount of data, we had to do a lot of
coordination work. We also combined institutions to develop a unified soil management policy and land
25
use reform. We determined who will be responsible for which kind of activities within the framework of the
GSP. Thus, over the past 2 years, we have done a great job of organizing ourselves.
We support joint research activity with the Russian Federation. As part of UNCCD activities, two years ago a
map of soil erosion and a map of desertification were compiled. In accordance with the results of these
studies, a program of erosion control measures supported by the World Bank was developed.
Uzbekistan (Mr. Umid Ubdullaev). Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-
meeting-session-4-uzbekistan-abdullaev (English).
Uzbekistan is the country most affected by climate change. The last two years there were very severe
drought, the summers were extremely hot, the temperature is almost the same day and night, and the
spring was rainy. This greatly affects the state of soils, water resources and agricultural development in
general. The area of irrigated soils in the country is 4.3 million ha. This is our wealth and we do not plan to
increase the area of rainfed agriculture. The most important task is updating the irrigation system.
With the advent of the new leadership of the country, a grandiose water management construction began.
We do not use our water limit, since water mainly passes in the winter, as a result of the last 3 years - the
strongest floods.
In the past two years, a number of important legal documents have been adopted that define the national
policy, strategy, programs and projects of SSM in Uzbekistan. Mr. Umid Ubdullaev presented a list of key
documents. About 15 laws and decrees aimed at the sustainable development of agriculture were adopted.
In addition, the work of the Tashkent Agrarian University, the biological and soil faculty of the National
University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek was strengthened, the laboratory of the State
Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan on geology and mineral resources was equipped with the latest
technology. Institute "UzGIP" creates its own laboratory.
Advisory centers have been created as part of the Tashkent Agrarian University and the National University
of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek, a separate consulting center has been created in Khorezm. A
number of state orders on the introduction of mineral and organic fertilizers have been issued. Great
attention to the use of soils by the government.
Investments have been made in the development of agriculture for a total amount of about 1 billion dollars
over the past 10 years. About 0.5 million hectares of dried up bottom of the Aral Sea was planted with
trees. About 3 million hectares is the new Aral Kum desert with a serious salt storm problem.
It was decided to introduce 200 thousand ha of drip irrigation each year. Studies have shown that in the
Hungry Steppe the general background of soil fertility has leveled off. To monitor the condition and fertility
of soils, district administrations are involved.
The problem of personnel as a whole in UzGIP is solved well, the higher school are connected with practive
at our institute, we have about 80 young employees. The question of salary is not worth it, because UzGIP
works completely on a contractual basis.
But the situation is not so good with soil scientists. Previously, there were state projects for the
comprehensive reconstruction of irrigated land, which included soil research. Now there are no such
orders, now farmers must order it, but they do not have the funds yet. We carried out several applied
projects under the roof of the FAO and showed clearly how to increase productivity with the help of simple
26
measures, such as a deep subsoiling, applying fertilizers in strictly defined terms. A farmers' school was
organized in which the farmers themselves shared their experiences. This work is leaded by universities.
Ukraine (Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk). Most of the projects that have been carried out in Ukraine over the past
two years have been highlighted in the Pillar 3 report. In Ukraine, there is one specialized Institute of Soil
Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovsky, and there are also departments of soil science at
agricultural universities across the country.
The main problems in the field of SSM in the country are as follows:
1. The materials of the last large-scale soil survey, which was carried out in 1957, correspond to
reality by only 30%. At present, a regulatory and methodological basis for re-examination of arable
area has been prepared, a nomenclature list of soils has been prepared, but so far there is no
funding.
2. The issue of organizing and conducting soil monitoring. The agrochemical certification system
should be transformed into a monitoring system, i.e. we must receive information in time and
space at stationary points.
3. Together with the GSP, a set of documents has been prepared for the creation of a SIS and SDF.
4. The draft State Soil Protection Program was submitted to the Government, but did not receive
support. We see the solution in creating the Soil Protection Fund.
5. The Ministry of Education and Science eliminated the specialty “soil science” from the classifier
of specialties. Only the specialty “agronomy” remained. We are looking for international classifiers
that can be referenced.
6. In connection with the land reform, new approaches have been prepared for soil rating and
normative monetary valuation of soils for both productive and environmental functions. This
technique is currently being considered in the Cabinet of Ministers. The course on lifting the
moratorium from the land market has been adopted; such documents are necessary.
These issues are heard at meetings of the Presidium of the NAAS. However, in recent years no funds have
been allocated for soil protection. The main task is to create a Soil Protection Fund. To date, the country is
not ready for the land market. We do not know soils value. But at the end of this year, a moratorium on the
sale of land should be lifted.
Kyrgyzstan (Mr. Jijitali Jumaliev). Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-meeting-
session-4-kirgizia-report-jumaliev (in Russian).
The report provided general information on the state of the country's land fund and on the level of
agricultural development. According to the land report, the area of the Kyrgyz Republic is 1 million 995
thousand hectares, of which the area of agricultural land is 6.7 million hectares (about 34%). In 2015-2018,
there is a decrease in the area of arable land. Data were provided on the quality of the land.
Changes have been made to the Land Code. The government has developed a state irrigation program for
2017-2026, where measures were identified for the development of new irrigated land. There are problems
with equipping soil laboratories. Two soil laboratories operate: in Naryn and Bishkek. It is planned to create
mobile laboratories in each district. After the land reform, farmers began to use nitrogen fertilizers more.
Moldova (Mr. Gheorghe Jigau). He presented a report on the history of the school of Moldavian soil
science, which takes its roots from the University of Moldova and talked about modern ideas of Moldavian
soil scientists about the possibilities of introducing SSM. According to them, ecological and organic
27
agriculture did not justify itself in the territory of Moldova. He noted an increase in desertification
processes in Moldova.
6.2 EASP contribution to global products (Pavel Krasilnikov)
From the very beginning, the EASP participated in all international GSP global projects, starting with the
Status of the World's Soil Resources: Main Report (2015). We wrote our regional chapter quickly and
efficiently.
The EASP has taken part in a global soil pollution assessment initiative. FAO hosted the Global Pollution
Symposium, for which a review of diffuse and point pollution was prepared. We presented a report on the
general state of soil pollution in the Eurasian region. EASP countries provided information on legislation in
the field of soil pollution, on the current state and on measures to eliminate the consequences of pollution.
References to this chapter have appeared in international literature.
The EASP also participated in the preparation of the Global Soil Organic Carbon Map. Some countries
worked directly with the GSP and studied in Rome. Some countries worked through the EASP Secretariat.
Most countries have succeeded in making updated soil carbon maps. Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan did not
provide a map. The data was extrapolated and the quality turned out to be much worse. We currently have
several priorities: we must help these countries. According to Mr. Ronald Vargas, South Korea has begun
financing a project to create a SIS in Kyrgyzstan. Tajikistan is next in line and we must think how to help.
The EASP secretariat can help with training, but there should be local specialists with a minimum level of
training. Participation in these two initiatives is our main contribution to GSP projects.
We must think about how we can participate in the creation of the Global Erosion Map. Currently, soil
erosion specialists mainly work at the risk level. Most models calculate potential erosion. Maps reflecting
the real situation are much less common, such only occur at the local level. The situation with the dynamics
of erosion processes is very bad. A manual should be created that will give a unified methodology. This is a
big challenge that requires funding.
The task of the NFPs is to ensure that the collection and provision of information for global initiatives is
financially encouraged at the state level.
The salinity map is much less labor intensive. However, a lot of work is required to correlate data on water
extraction and electrical conductivity.
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez briefly repeated the report on 21 activities of the GSP and once again focused on
what contribution is needed from the EASP. Most initiatives require the identification of responsible
experts and organizations.
Commentary by Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: according to the assessment of soil pollution: The most unpleasant
thing is that in Ukraine Sanitary/Hygienic Norms and Regulations that determined maximum allowable
concentrations were cancelled. Russian colleagues have developed indicative maximum allowable
concentrations. A single methodological document is needed: either an international approach, or a
compilation of pollution assessment approaches adopted in the post-Soviet countries.
By erosion: specialists study only the potential ability of soils to erosion. Until we create a monitoring
network of sites to assess erosion dynamics, it will be difficult for us to make a global assessment. We need
to work out the methodological part. This is the most complex map, and decide what we will display on it.
On salinity: it is necessary to prepare two maps: one based on the water extract analyses and another - on
electrical conductivity.
28
Ms. Maria Konyushkova: In 2018, a specialist from the UAE estimated the relationship between electrical
conductivity and different salt extracts (1:10, 1:5 and 1:1) from 10 data sources. The correlation coefficient
strongly depends on the chemical composition, which was studied very well in the former Soviet Union
countries. There will be 4 categories in the map: non-saline, slightly-, medium- and highly saline. That is,
there will be no problems for a qualitative transition from a water extract to a degree of salinity.
Mr. Ronald Vargas: We are trying to create a Global Map of Soil Salinity, and we are preparing a concept
note and technical specification. There were a lot of different opinions, but we reached an understanding
and decided to use the available EU data. We will officially launch the INSAS at the meeting dedicated to
the 20th anniversary of the International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA) in Dubai in November
20191. The network should become a platform for developing saline soil management and mapping
approaches. You should have received a concept note, and give your comments as soon as possible, so that
we could present a consensus by November.
Thus, we have 3 activities on salt-affected soils:
1. Mapping. The GSP will conduct trainings on the mapping of saline soils, we will ask you to nominate
an expert from the country, who will then be able to manage this activity within the country.
2. Participation in the activities of the INSAS - discussion of technical issues, including mapping.
3. Global symposium on salt-affected soils in October 2020 in Uzbekistan.
This is a very important issue in the region, and we cannot manage without your expert opinion.
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: The symposium in Uzbekistan will be a very global meeting. Inform us
about your developments, present the results of your research. There will be field tours.
Suggestions were also made to include technogenic salinization and to take into account the experience on
secondary salinization.
Mr. Ronald Vargas: Symposium will not be a scientific conference; this is a political event. A global action
plan for saline soil management should be developed by this time.
6.3 Support to the promotion of SSM – GSP Phase II Results (Natalia Rodriguez)
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez listed the main types of activities to promote SSM within the framework of GSP
projects carried out in conjunction with other international initiatives.
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-the-implementation-of-the-project-
support-to-the-promotion-of-sustainable-soil-management-in-the-framework-of-the-global-soil-
partnership-phase-ii (English)
The amount of funding by the Russian Federation for the period from 01/06/2015 to 12/31/2018 amounted
to $ 1 million, for the period from 01/01/2019 to 12/31/2020 - $ 2 million.
Discussion and suggestions
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: Considering the water-regulating role of peat soils, it is possible to raise the question
of creating an international guide for their use.
Mr. Samvel Sahakyan: the assessment of the activities of organizations and individual scientists is uneven.
Consider how to make a separate assessment.
1 By the moment this Report was prepared INSAS had been launched http://www.fao.org/global-soil-partnership/resources/highlights/detail/ru/c/1252161/
29
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: JRC planned the publication of the World Atlas of Peat Soils. Perhaps this idea will be
returned, and the GSP will make sense to join.
About the Williams Museum of Soil and Agriculture. If some funds are used to improve museum work,
that’s good. However, the museum collection cannot serve as the basis for GLOSIS, since there are no
geographical coordinates for monoliths.
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: perhaps we will make more efforts to update the collection than to use materials for
databases.
Mr. Ivan Vasenev: the value of the Williams Museum lies in the fact that the collection set is very unique in
its location in landscapes and in terms of land use. Most monoliths do not have exact coordinates, but are
tied to the soil contours on maps of that time. Therefore, it is possible to study the analysis of ecological
functions. If it will be possible to create a digital museum, at least partially as in Wageningen with the
possibility of online demonstration, this will significantly expand the possibilities of popularizing soil
science.
6.4 EASP Synergies with other initiatives (Ronald Vargas)
Mr. Ronald Vargas highlighted the EASP's main points of interaction with other international initiatives in
the field of SSM.
Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/synergies-with-other-initiatives (English).
Interaction is carried out mainly through projects under the UN conventions. This is facilitated by the
activities of the ITPS. We have a joint work plan with the UNCCD. We are participating in the initiative on
LDN achievement by 2030. Recently, a call has been announced from the UNCCD to scientists and
politicians to join forces. We have our own agenda, and we must continue to adhere to it. All institutions
and conventions have their own agendas of interests and can do without GSP.
We are engaged in mapping of carbon sequestration potential, because we do not know we need this for
calculations. Soil recarbonization is what we need maps, calculations for, we are trying to cooperate, and
we need to identify regional platforms and initiatives with which we can cooperate. If you have any
thoughts with whom it would be worthwhile to establish a relationship on this issue - tell us now,
sometimes there may be unobvious decisions.
Mr. Ivan Vasenev: society underestimates the potential role of soils in carbon sequestration. It is easier to
map the sequestration potential using separate representative monitoring sites where research is being
conducted and maps that exist.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: assessing the potential of soil sequestration in agriculture is the main objective of the
CIRCASA consortium - Coordination of International Research Cooperation on Soil Carbon Sequestration in
Agriculture, supported by the “Horizon-2020” project of the EC. CIRCASA is a science project that is
consistent with Pillar 3.
Experience in interaction with WHO has shown that this organization is very attentive to soils as a source of
healthy nutrition. And they negatively relate to organic farming - as act on the principle of equal access to
quality food.
Mr. Arkadiy Levin: there is the opportunity to interact with the International Cryosphere Initiative, which
includes the countries of Northern Europe, Canada and the USA, and holds seminars on the introduction of
SSM technologies in relation to the management of plant residues (do not burn straw).
30
Mr. Ronald Vargas: The UNFCCC recognizes that soil sequestration is one of the solutions. We are proposing
to establish a different set of indicators that can show the potential ability of soils to absorb and fix carbon
In September GSP presented soil sequestration at the UN Climate Change Summit in New York, so I’m sure
there will be investments. Pavel mentioned CIRCASA, this is a wonderful scientific project, but it is still not a
global initiative.
Among such soil threats as erosion, salinization, and sequestration, the latter is the most difficult to
calculate. We know the challenges and have a group of experts that leads research using machine learning,
and they will give us their thoughts on whether we can do this. We are in contact with CIRCASA and invited
them to be part of the working group.
We are in contact with the WHO on organizing a Global symposium on soil pollution. They have their own
resources, but we continue to look for other sources of funding.
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: we contacted the European office of WHO, it is quite active in environment
pollution, mainly in soil pollution. In fact, they are involved in the global soil pollution assessment process.
6.5 Book on SSM in Eurasian region discussion (Pavel Krasilnikov)
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov said that the main product in the implementation of the VGSMM will be a book
prepared by a working group led by Mr. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova. The book is designed for different
stakeholders. The book will cover a wide range of issues related to SLM in the Eurasian region, including
social, economic and political aspects.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov announced the contents of the book and suggested identifying experts and specialists
by chapter from different countries. The contents of the book are given in Annex 5.
Comments and suggestions on the book.
Mr. Ivan Vasenev: the consideration of climate change is going on as purely negative, but for Russia.
Ukraine and Belarus, it carries the potential to expand the agricultural zone, it is necessary to strengthen
the climate component.
In the section on management systems, it is necessary to consider the change in land use in various farming
systems.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: information and methodological and normative and methodological support of the
SSM implementation should be emphasized, along with scientific one.
The volume of the book is 25,000-46,000 words and it will contain colourful illustrations. A slight increase in
volume is possible. The book should be written before October 2020.
7 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 adoption and move forward
All suggestions and comments on the RIR expressed by the participants during two days were taken into
account. Particular attention was paid to ensure that the EASP RPR is consistent with the GSP working plan.
Mr. Ronald Vargas noted that the huge scientific heritage accumulated in EASP countries, and institutions
continue to produce a large amount of data, but most do not use modern methods. The idea of the GSP is
to combine the work of all these institutions that produce information and harmonize it.
We do not have special funds to create a soil information system in Ukraine, as it happened in Armenia, but
we will help methodically and seek funds. As an option, the GEF project in Ukraine.
Mr. Ronald Vargas suggested expressing ideas on strengthening the EASP working network.
31
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: organize seminars to exchange experiences and present new specialists of
international level during EASP meetings. To expand the EASP, first of all, more people are needed in each
country.
Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: to organize presentations and lectures for local students and specialists together with
EASP meetings. Attract administration representatives to EASP meetings.
To ensure that there are active NFPs. There are people who can work in partnership, but so far they have
not been able to convey to the country's leadership the importance of the EASP and achieve the
appointment of the NFP.
It is necessary to attract more youth. EASP gives young people opportunities for professional growth,
seeking funding.
Ms. Elena Sukhacheva: do interim reports every six months.
Mr. HukmatulloAkhmadov: to provide information to each other, respond to requests, communicate more.
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: the arrival of Ronald Vargas was a real event at the Institute in Kharkov. Young
people touched big things, participated in the compilation of global maps, which significantly improved the
moral and psychological climate in the institute.
If you look at the soil cover of EASP, this is a huge variety of soils and there should be different priorities for
their management.
We underestimate such a source of information as long-term stationary experiments. In Ukraine, 89 such
experiments. This is the only reliable source of information on soil evolution today, tied to a coordinate
system.
The experiments can be classified into 4 categories: 1) interstate (for example, Poltava experimental
station), 2) global, 3) regional and 4) local.
Also, studies on appraisal and degradation economics are still underdeveloped.
Mr. Jijitali Jumaliev: use modern means of communication for more regular communication (newsgroups).
8 Formation of WGs on five Pillars and election of WG Coordinators
Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova noted that over the past period the activity of the working groups on the
Pillars was insufficient. As Chairman of the EASP, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova announced the
nomination for the WGs members and coordinators of WGs for each pillar from the EASP Secretariat.
The composition of the working groups was decided to be approved after the meeting based on the results
of coordination with the candidates for each Pillar in each country.
Ms. Natalia Rodriguez, after meeting in Chisinau, sent inquiries to countries. As a result, by the end of
December 2019, the following countries submitted candidates: Armenia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova,
Russia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Ukraine. The WGs members list is given in Annex 4.
During the voting the participants unanimously supported the candidacy of Mr. Iurii Rozloga as Chairman of
Pillar 4. The chairpersons of the remaining Pillars remained unchanged.
32
It was decided to appoint focal points from the EASP Secretariat for each Pillar:
Pillar 1: Mr. Alexey Sorokin
Pillar 2: Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva
Pillar 3: Ms. Maria Konyushkova
Pillar 4: Mr. Oleg Golozubov
Pillar 5: Ms. Olga Yakimenko.
As a result of the meeting, the Chisinau Communiqué was adopted, where the commitments and intentions
of the members of the EASP for 2020-2023 were fixed. Important intentions of the Chisinau communiqué
are:
• Promoting the implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on Sustainable Soil Management and the
International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of Fertilizers in the EASP countries;
• Increasing investments in SSM, including supporting the national financial and thematic contribution to
the regional grant applications (GEF, EC and other financial mechanisms);
• Promoting the dissemination of knowledge on soils through the mass media, the World Soil Day
campaign, soil museums, and thematic classes for students at the national and regional levels;
• Development of a program of activities and events for interaction with agricultural producers in order to
identify gaps in knowledge and disseminate knowledge and experience;
• Conducting small research projects on SSM, as well as promoting the publication and dissemination of
research results.
Photos from the meeting are available on the Flickr storage FAO official account by the link.
33
Annex I – List of Participants
№ Имя Фамилия Страна Организация
1 Boris Aparin Russia V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science, Saint-Petersburg State University
2 Umid Abdullaev Uzbekistan LLC «UzGIP»
3 Hukmatullo Ahmadov Tajikistan Academy of Agricultural Sciences
4 Svyatoslav Baliuk Ukraine Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy
5 Ivan Vasenev Russia Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy
6 Ronald Vargas FAO GSP
7 Oleg Golozubov Russia ECFS
8 Hernán González FAO GEF Department, Climate and Biodiversity Division
9 Maksim Dabahov Russia Nizhny Novgorod Agricultural Academy
10 Jijitali Jumaliev Kyrgyzstan Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation
11 Geogre Jigau Moldova Moldavian Society of Soil Scientists (Chairman), Moldavian State University
12 Anna Kontoboytseva Russia ECFS
13 Maria Konyushkova Russia ECFS
14 Pavel Krasilnikov Russia ECFS
15 Arkadiy Levin Ukraine Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy
16 Mihai Lezanu Moldova Faculty of biology and soil science of Moldavian State University
17 Nadejda Manyuk Uzbekistan LLC «UzGIP»
18 Iurie Moshoi Moldova Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo
19 Kristina Prokopyeva Russia ECFS
20 Natalia Rodriguez Eugenio
FAO GSP
21 Iurii Rozloga Moldova Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo
22 Samvel Sahakyan Armenia Soil Science, Melioration and Agrochemistry Scientific Center named after H. Petrosyan of National Agrarian University of Armenia
23 Alexey Sorokin Russia ECFS
24 Elena Sukhacheva Russia V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science
25 Yuxin Tong FAO GSP
26 Gulchekhra Khasankhanova Uzbekistan LLC «UzGIP»
27 Nikolai Tsybulko Belarussia Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry of Academy of Science of the Republic of Belarus
28 Hakki Emrah Erdogan Turkey Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock
34
Annex II – Agenda
Fifth Eurasian Soil Partnership Plenary Meeting
30 September - 1 October 2019, Chişinău, Moldova
30 September 2019 Venue: State University of Moldova, Chişinău, Moldova
8:30 – 9:00 Registration
Session 1: Opening of the workshop and GSP overview Moderator: Gulchekhra Khasankhanova
9:00 – 09:30 Welcome and Opening Remarks EASP Chair Moldova Agriculture representative GSP Secretariat
9:30 – 10:30 GSP developments of regional interest GSP Secretariat
10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break
Session 2: EASP progress Moderator: Iurie Mosoi
11:00 – 11:30 General report on the activities of the Eurasian Soil Partnership (EASP) in 2017- 2019
EASP Chair
11:30 – 11:45 Report on Pillar 1 activities Hakki E. Erdogan
11:45 – 12:00 Report on Pillar 2 activities Elena Sukhacheva
12:00 – 12:15 Report on Pillar 3 activities Svyatoslav Baliuk
12:15 – 12:30 Report on Pillar 4 activities Oleg Golozubov
12:30 – 13:30 Lunch
13:30 – 13:45 Report on Pillar 5 activities Hukmatullo Ahmadov
13:45 – 14:00 Interactions with the ESP to establish an effective RESOLAN Hakki Emrah Erdogan (ESP Pillar 5 Chair)
14:00 – 15:00 Discussion on progress done and left behind EASP Secretariat
15:00 – 15:30 Coffee break / Group picture
Session 3: EASP implementation plan Moderator: Pavel Krasilnikov
15:00 – 17:00 Workplan 2020-2023: Discussion on the priorities and associated resource mobilization strategy
EASP Secretariat
17:00 – 18:00 Discussion of the GEF7 regional project on "Conduct the balance between conservation and use of the soil resources in Eurasian agro-production landscape"
Hakki Emrah
Erdogan
1 October 2019 Venue: State University of Moldova, Chişinău, Moldova
35
Session 4: Relevant national and global initiatives Moderator: Maria Konyushkova
8:30 – 10:30 Report of the relevant national activities National focal points
10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break
11:00 – 12:00 EASP contribution to global products EASP Secretariat
12:00 – 12:15 Report on the implementation of the project: Support to the promotion of sustainable soil management in the framework of the Global Soil Partnership: Phase II
GSP Secretariat
12:15 – 12:30 Synergies with other initiatives GSP Secretariat
12:30 – 13:30 Lunch
Session 5: EASP way forward Moderator: Ronald Vargas
13:30 – 14:15 Adoption of the revised Implementation Plan for the period 2020-2023
EASP Chair
14:15 – 14:45 Strategy to strengthen the EASP network. Role of national focal points and the need of nominating a technical alternate
EASP Secretariat
14:45 – 15:00 Election of the Pillars WG coordinators and appointment of national coordinators for the working groups of the five Pillars.
EASP Chair
15:00 – 15:30 Coffee break
Session 6: Agreements and closure of the workshop Moderator: Gulchekhra Khasankhanova
15:30-16:30 Discussion and adoption of the resolution of the meeting (Chişinău Communiqué)
16:30-17:00 Closing remarks GSP Secretariat
In collaboration with
36
Annex III – EASP Implementation plan
Output/Outcome Activity Description Executive Execution period (start-end)
Funding requirement and amount
Pillar 1: Promote sustainable management of soil resources for soil protection, conservation and sustainable productivity.
1.1. Implementation of Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management (VG SSM) in Eurasian region, including International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of Fertilizers (Fertilizer Code)
1.1.1.Preparation of a Concept Note (CN) on the implementation of the VG SSM and the Fertilizer Code in the EASP countries, including the compilation of a list of stakeholders. Choosing the Steering Organization from each country. Development of a guideline (scenario) for national multi-stakeholder workshops.
Working group (WG) Pillar 1
January – March 2020
EASP Secretariat funds for operating expenses (amount not determined)
1.1.2. Organizing of national multi-stakeholder workshops for VG SSM implementation.
Focal points (FPs)and Steering Organization from each country
April 2020 –2023 Inner funds of Steering organizations
1.1.3. Organizing the regional workshop on dissemination and implementation of VG SSM and Fertilizer Code
EASP Secretariat, Informational support: GSP Secretariat, Ms.Zineb Bazza
2020 38 000 $
1.1.4. Dissemination of proven practices for sustainable soil carbon management in the countries of the region based on the Technical Guidelines for Organic Soil Carbon Management prepared by ITPS, the principles of the RECSOIL project, in collaboration with the CIRCASA project.
EASP Secretariat WG Pillar 1
2020-2023 EASP and GSP Secretariats NA
1.2. Establishment of active working groups (WG) for all Pillars
1.2.1. Setting up the WG on each Pillar: nominating of minimum 5 experts from each country
FPs, GSP Secretariat, Natalia Rodrigues
January-February 2020
No special funds needed (NO)
1.3. Сreation of national soil partnerships
1.3.1. Preparation of the Concept notes on creation of the national soil partnerships, including an up-to-date list of stakeholders for the implementation of SSM practices: politicians and government representatives, farmers associations, NGOs.
EASP Secretariat, WG Pillar 1
May 2020 NO
1.4. Development of agro-ecological Knowledge database on SLM practices and their mapping and dissemination among land users
1.4.1. Analysis of the actually status, approaches and trends of different databases and sources of information on SLM / SSM. Choose WOCAT as main database.
WG Pillar 1 Coordination: EASP Secretariat, FPs.
January 2019 NO
1.4.2. Preparation of a CN on an inventory of successful projects, practices, methodologies, approaches, scientific and scientific-practical research in the field of SLM for various
EASP Secretariat, GSP Secretariat
February 2020 NO
37
landscape conditions and features and land use.
1.4.3. Inventory of projects in the field of SLM and mapping of successful practices with brief descriptions and contacts of local and regional practices used in EASP countries. Inventory and mapping will be carried out taking into account international requirements, standards, rules and guidelines of FAO, WOCAT and others.
EASP Secretariat, FPs. June – September 2020
Funds of EASP Secretariat NA
1.5. Participation in the Black Soils Network activities
1.5.1.Developing a regional chapter for the Report on assessing the international status of Black, clarification the evolution trends of Chernozem soils in natural landscapes and in agroecosystems in Eurasian Region.
WG Pillar 1 and 3, GSP Secretariat
First draft of the chapter - first half of 2020
Funds of Institutions NA
1.5.2. Intensification of actions to provide conservational landuse status to Chernozem soils.
1.5.3.Preparation and organization of the next Meeting on the Black Soils Network, according to the Kharbin Communique in Ukraine (Kharkiv)
GSP and EASP Secretariat, Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy
2020-2021 GSP and EASP Secretariat funds NA
1.6. Participation in the International Network of Salt-Affected Soils
1.6.1. Activities according to the agenda of the International Saline Soils Network and organization of Global Symposium on Salt-affected soils.
EASP and GSP Secretariats
2020 GSP Secretariats Funds NA
1.7. Preparation and publication of the book “Sustainable soil management in the Eurasian region”
1.7.1. Writing according to the developed content and publishing a book in Russian, which will cover a wide range of issues related to SSM in the Eurasian region, including social, economic and political aspects. The volume of the book is 25,000-46,000 words.
Coordination: EASP Chair, FPs
January 2020 – August 2020
EASP Secretariat 4 000$
1.8. Preparation of guidelines and teaching materials for SLM.
1.8.1. Development of guidelines on sustainable land management (SLM) practices in the Eurasian region in the context of climate change
EASP Secretariat January – March 2020
Financial from agreement between the EASP Secretariat and ICARDA
1.9. Creation of an inter-regional EASP network as a platform for adaptation and expansion of climate resilient approaches and technologies for SSM / SLM
1.9.1. Leading of consultations to develop the organizational structure, responsibilities and mechanisms of the distribution network. 1.9.2. Development and implementation of training modules and knowledge products for dissemination and replication. 1.9.3. Development of an action plan for training activities.
38
Pillar 2: Encourage investment, technical cooperation, policy, education awareness and extension in soil.
2.1. Assistance in increasing investments for SSM
2.1.1. Support for the development of concept documents and project proposals for the main financial mechanisms in the context of the priorities of the global agenda.
WG Pillar 2, FPs
2020-2023 NO
2.1.1.1. Preparation of the GEF7 regional project “Conduct the balance between conservation and use of the soil resources in Eurasian agro-production landscapes”
FPs of Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan
January-February 2020
2.1.2. Identify key investors to support the dissemination of SLM practices.
EASP Secretariat April 2020 November 2021
2.1.3. Conducting regional training and consultations for key stakeholders on approaches, policies and mechanisms of financing strategies for SLM-SLM
2021-2022
2.2. Promoting awareness among politics and decision makers about the importance of soils and their conservation. Participation in the adoption of legal documents on soil management and their protection at the national level.
2.2.1. Active participation in the development and adoption of legal documents related to soil (laws, standards and regulations on soil cultivation, the use of fertilizers and pesticides, documents encouraging conscientious land users, etc.). 2.2.2. Updating the FAOLEX database by new national legal documents on soils and disseminating the database tools among stakeholders.
FPs 2020-2023 NO
2.3. Training of specialists in the collection, analysis, processing and display of available soil data through in person and online learning and through knowledge extension services.
2.3.1. Training of specialists through the organization of in person and online seminars on soil data management (connection with the activities on Pillar 4, paragraph 4.1).
EASP Secretariat, WGs Pillar 2 and 4
2020-2023 EASP Secretariat funds NA
2.3.2. Assessing the potential of existing extension services (farmers' unions, scientific and educational centers, agrometeorological services, etc.) to provide advice and training to farmers and other target groups, taking into account the lessons learned and recommendations of the WB Social Capital Project and other EASP events.
WG Pillar 2 2020
2.3.3. Identification of effective and reliable services in the EASP countries as key centers of advisory services for the creation of a unified EASP advisory service system for technology transfer and extension of knowledges on SSM/SLM in collaboration and cooperation with ESP and GSP.
WG Pillar 2 2021
39
2.3.4. Transfer the experience of existing extension services (in Ukraine and Uzbekistan).
WG Pillar 2 2020-2022
2.3.5. Assessment of the potential of creation of regional permanent scientific-educational centers on salt effected soils management, conservation of black soils and economic of degradation.
WG Pillar 2, WG Pillar 3
2020
2.4. Publication of informational and popular scientific materials about soils.
2.4.1. Publication of popular scientific materials on the important role of soils in ensuring food and environmental security, including the creation of infographics on the economic benefits of applying SSM. 2.4.2. Distributing materials at the external related events and via the Internet to politicians, farmer communities, and other stakeholders. 2.4.3. Publication of World Soil Day campaign materials in national languages.
EASP Secretariat Every year in preparation for World Soil Day and as needed
EASP Secretariat 3 400 $ + involved funds
2.5. World Soil Day campaign. 2.4.1. Organization of World Soil Day events. 2.4.2. Exchange of contacts, distribution of campaign materials through regional and national professional networks. 2.4.3. Raising public awareness about the campaign of World Soil Day through the media, social networks.
EASP Secretariat FPs
October-December 2020-2023
EASP Secretariat 20 000 $
2.6. Re-organization and updating of the collection of the Williams Museum of Soil and Agriculture
Reorganization of the museum's collection in accordance with WRB and international standards for storing soil data, including digitizing collections and contribute this data into the Global Soil Information System (GLOSIS).
GSP Secretariat Williams Museum of Soil and Agriculture
2020-2021 GSP Secretariat 400 000 $
2.7. Strengthening communication and exchange of information between specialists whose activities are related to soil.
Organizing two regional seminars with the aim of enhancing the exchange of information, maintaining communication and involving new stakeholders.
EASP Secretariat
July 2020 November 2020
EASP Secretariat 25 000$
Pillar 3: Promote targeted soil research and development focusing on identified gaps, priorities and synergies with related productive, environmental and social development actions.
3.1. Participation in establishment of a Global Soil R&D Platform.
Reviewing the most important researches and practical studies and initiatives in the field of soil science and dissemination the information about them.
GSP and EASP Secretariats
2020-2023 Funds of GSP and EASP Secretariats
40
3.2. Conducting of Small Research Projects in the field of economic evaluation of the implementation of SSM, sustainable practices to reduce anthropogenic salinization and/or increase the soils organic carbon content and applied projects on the use of innovative agricultural practices.
3.2.1. Publication of the results of research and applied projects in the field of economic evaluation of the implementation of SSM, sustainable management of saline soils, soil organic carbon management.
EASP Secretariat
2020-2023 EASP Secretariat + Involved funds
3.2.2. Presentation of the best research results at EASP seminars, conferences and plenary assemblies.
2020-2023
3.2.3. Selection of best practices in soil cultivation, fertilizer management, methods for reducing soil erosion (methods, patents, innovative developments) by the analysis of WOCAT and other databases.
By December 2020
3.2.4. Transfer of knowledge to farmers and stakeholders through the organization of round tables, webinars, and the production of information materials.
3.3. Participation in activity on soil pollution
3.3.1. Participation in developing the guidelines for assessing, mapping, monitoring and reporting on soil pollution. 3.3.2. Participation in developing a database of good practices for managing and remediating soil pollution. Providing country-driven process in line with the UNEA3 resolution for the preparation of the regional part of the Global Assessment of the Status of Soil Pollution.
WG Pillar 3 2020-2023
3.4. Participation in the preparation of the Global Symposiums
3.4.1. Global Symposium on Soil Biodiversity FPs WG Pillar 3 WG Pillar 2
March 2020 Contribution of the host countries of the Symposiums
3.4.2. Global Symposium on Soil Salinity October 2020
3.4.3. Global Symposium on Soil Fertility 2021
3.5. Contribution to the Soil Atlas of Asia, developed by JRC and FAO
3.5.1. Development of a small-scale soil map of Central Asia. 3.5.2. Providing data for the Soil Atlas of Asia (soil data, images, etc.)
FPs and Institutes 2020-2022 JRC Funds (for publication and for meetings of the Editorial Board).
3.6. Contribution to updating of Soil Atlas of Europe, developed by JRC and FAO
3.6.1. Updating the soil maps of Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova. 3.6.2. Providing data for the Soil Atlas of Europe (soil data, images, etc.)
FPs and Institutes 2020-2022
Pillar 4: Enhance the quantity and quality of soil data and information: data collection (generation), analysis, validation, reporting, monitoring and integration with other disciplines.
4.1. Support for the establishment and operation of national soil data-centers including the basis of existing
4.1.1. Elaboration of the contact persons for creation and support of the data-centers.
4.1.2. The manifestation of initiatives from countries to organize
MSU, FPs
2020-2023 NA EASP Secretariat +
41
agrochemistry services. face-to-face and distance courses and seminars on the creation and operation of soil data centers (Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan). 4.1.3. Remote technical support for the data-centers.
Involved funds from countries
4.2. Contribution to the GloSIS Project
4.2.1. Elaboration of the responsible persons for each map from the each country.
FPs, GSP Secretariat
By the March of 2020
Funds of Institutions NA
4.2.2. Participation in the development of technical documentation and creation of the Global soil salinity map (GSSmap)
2020-2021
4.2.3. Participation in the development of technical documentation and assistance in defining regional input data for Global soil organic carbon sequestration (GSOCseq map)
2020
4.2.4. Participation in the development of technical documentation and creation of the global soil erosion maps (GSERmaps)
2020-2021
4.3.Creation of the national soil information systems (CountrySIS)
4.3.1. Develop an Armenian Soil Information System (ArSIS) based on legacy soil data for the Republic of Armenia. Digitization of soil maps of the country.
GSP Secretariat, Soil Science, Melioration and Agrochemistry Scientific Center named after H. Petrosyan
2020 GSP Secretariat Funds 200 000$
4.3.2. Develop an Ukranian Soil Information System (UkrSIS) based on legacy soil data for the Ukraine. Digitization of soil maps of the country by the 1:200000 scale using WRB.
GSP and EASP Secretariat, Institute for Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy
2020 GSP Secretariats Funds NA
Pillar 5: Harmonization of methods, measurements and indicators for the sustainable management and protection of soil resources.
5.1. Promotion of the international soil classification (WRB) as a parallel system of soil denomination through publications and training
5.1.1. Promoting of WRB through on-line trainings
EASP Secretariat 2020-2023 EASP Secretariat funds + internal sources of the institutions
5.1.2. Organization of workshops on WRB promotion in St. Petersburg on the basis of the V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science and in other countries (to be defined).
WG Pillar 5
2020-2021
5.2. Creation of the digital soil descriptions and standards on national languages.
Development and filling of localized object models of soil descriptions in the joint standards (ISO 28258, Soil ML, EASP ML)
EASP Secretariats and data-centers’s contact persons
42
5.3. Participation in activities of Global Soil Laboratory Network (GLOSOLAN).
5.3.1. Holding EUROSOLAN workshops (the second - it was preliminary decided to organize in Tbilisi)
EASP and GSP Secretariats
October 2020 GSP Secretariat funds, 75 000$
5.3.2. Strengthening connection between laboratories in Europe and Asia
WG Pillar 5 2020-2023
5.3.3. Nomination of national reference laboratories WG Pillar 5, FPs January-March 2020
5.3.4. Ring test of samples provided by FAO WG Pillar 5 January -June 2020
5.3.5. Support activities for data harmonization WG Pillar 5, EASP and GSP Secretariats
2020
5.3.6. Creation of standard samples of reference materials for modal genetic soil types
WG Pillar 5 End of 2020, after GLOSOLAN meeting
43
Annex IV – EASP Working Groups
Country Pillar 1 Pillar 2 Pillar 3 Pillar 4 Pillar 5
Armenia Mr. Hunan Ghazaryan Mr. Davit Mejlumyan Mr. Samvel Sahakyan Mr. Gurgen
Eghiazaryan Mr. Vachagan Davtyan
Azerbaijan
Belarus
Georgia Mr. Gizo Gogichaishvili Mr. Giorgi Ghambashidze Mr. Giorgi Ghambashidze Mr. Giorgi
Ghambashidze Mr. Gizo Gogichaishvili
Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan Mr. Ermek Baibagyshov Mr. Nurudin Karabaev Mr. Sovetbek
Mamytkanov Mr. Askat Bayanov
Mr. Kutman Isaev Mr. Sovetbek Mamytkanov
Moldova Mr. Iurie Moșoi Ms. Tamara Leah Mr. Gheorghe Jigău Dr. Iurii Rozloga Ms Tamara Ceban
Russian Federation
Mr. Maxim Dabakhov
Ms. Olga Andreeva
Ms. Olga Chernova Mr. Sergei Chernyanskiy
Mr.Dmitry Rukhovich Mr. Yurii Litvinov
Ms. Elena Shamrikova
Tajikistan Mr.Bakhtovar Khudaikulov
Mr. Abduhamid Asrorov Mr. Sharif Aminov Ms. Nigorabegim Noyoftova
Ms. Gulniso Nekushoeva
Turkey Mr.Hakki Emrah Erdogan
Mr. Tarik Topcu Mr.Bulent Sonmez Dr.Yilmaz Ulku Ms.Yilmaz Ulku
Turkmenistan
Ukraine Mr. Vasyl Dehtiarov Mr. Serhii Chernyi Mr. Sviatoslav Baliuk Mr. Anatolii Balaiev Mr. Maxim Solokha
Uzbekistan Dr. Gulchekhra Khasanklhanova
Mr. Umid Abdullaev Ms. Laziza Gafurova, Ms. Tatyana Khamzina
Mr. Rustam Ibragimov
Ms. Inna Kojevnikova
Regional Chairs
Mr. Hakki E. Erdogan Turkey
Ms. Elena Sukhacheva Russian Federation
Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk Ukraine
Mr. Iurii Rozloga Moldova
Mr.Hukmatullo Ahmadov Tajikistan
Responsible from the EASP
Secretariat Mr. Alexey Sorokin Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva Mr. Maria Konyushkova Mr. Oleg Golozubov Ms. Olga Yakimenko
44
Annex V – Draft contents of the book
«Sustainable soil management in the Eurasian region»
Outline Volume Authors
I. Introduction Concept/definitions of soil quality and sustainable soil management (SSM), soil sustainability and conservation, attributes and characteristics, objectives, role and value of contribution publications for food security (FS) and land degradation neutrality (LDN) in the region
2000-3000 words
S.Baliuk P.Krasilnikov I.Mosoi G.Khasankhanova
II. Driving forces of soil degradation
3000-6000 words
2.1. Growth of consumption The article considers the demographic factor, which is especially relevant in Central Asia, the issues of food security and balanced nutrition, the growth of consumption of meat and dairy products, the rate on agriculture as a source of income from exports
1000-2000 words
A.Sorokin
2.2. Climate change The positive and negative influences of regional climate changes are considered: warming without strong drought (production potential increasing) and aridization with desertification taking into account the frequency of extreme weather events in Eurasia
1000-2000 words
D.Karelin I. Vasenev
2.3. Urbanization and formation of rural agglomerations The role of urban settlements formation in changing the ratio of agricultural producers and consumers is shown. It is indicated that the growth of urbanization leads to the withdrawal of the best land from circulation
1000-2000 words
T.Prokofieva V. Vasenev
III. Causes of soil degradation
5000-10000 words
It is proposed to include 3-4 authors from subregions
3.1. Land-use change in different farming systems Deforestation, plowing of steppes, transfer of natural grassland ecosystems and woodlands to pastures are considered together with current changes in farming systems, environmental infrastructure and crop rotation
1000-2000 words
S.Baliuk N.Miroshnichenko V.Solovey I. Vasenev
3.2. Unsustainable land use 3.2.1. Violations of rules and technologies of agriculture The use of monoculture and irrational crop rotations, insufficient fertilization, violation of tillage technology, lack of erosion control measures, etc. are considered 3.2.2. Excessively intensive agriculture Excessive application of pesticides, fertilizers, the use of heavy machinery, overgrazing, etc.
2000-4000 words
S.Baliuk I.Plisco N.Miroshnichenko V.Kolyada
3.3. Impact of industry, transport and urban waste The influence of technogenic pollution and littering of productive soils as a result of the impact of technogenic sources not related to agriculture is considered
1000-2000 words
А.Fateev N.Miroshnichenko
3.4. Changes in hydrology and water regime Discusses the negative effect of decreasing and increasing groundwater levels, changes in water-regime, flooding of soils, etc.
1000-2000 words
G.Khasankhanova S.Baliuk R. Truskavetski Include hydrologists from Russia
IV. Current state and management of soil resources in the Eurasian 5000-8000 P.Krasilnikov
45
region words G.Khasankhanova
4.1. Soil cover of the Eurasian region as an object of management Climate, vegetation, dominant soil types, land use/land cover, agro-ecological zones, soil fertility status
1000-2000 words
М.Konyushkova V.Solovey
4.2. Systems of management Dominant economic systems in the subregions of the Eurasian region (for example, deserts, semi-deserts, flat areas including flood plains, foothills, low mountains, etc. on precipitation, crops, types of management)
1000-2000 words
P.Krasilnikov G.Khasankhanova Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia
4.3. Soil degradation in Eurasian region 4.3.1. Nutrients imbalance 4.3.2. Loss of organic carbon and increased СО2 emissions 4.3.3. The decline of biodiversity
4.3.4. Water and wind erosion 4.3.5. Desertification and physical degradation 4.3.6. Soil sealing 4.3.7. Unsettled water regime 4.3.8. Natural and anthropogenic salinization, alkalinization and acidification 4.3.9. Technogenic pollution 4.3.10. Distribution and vulnerability of agriculture and water resources, target groups and vulnerable regions
3000-4000 words
I.Mosoi А.Saparov L.Gafurova S.Baliuk А.Fateev Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia
V. Impact of soil degradation on society Biophysical impacts, socio-economic and environmental, and expected changes as a result of climate change
2000-4000 words
5.1. Ecosystem services related to soils and their loss through degradation Loss of ecosystem services due to soil degradation, including production services, biodiversity maintenance services, water filtration, carbon sequestration, etc., are considered.
1000-2000 words
S.Baliuk E.Drozd Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia
5.2. Economics of land degradation in the region Examples (cases) of sustainable and unsustainable land use in the region, in particular irrigated soils, pastures, monocultures or heavy machinery use and alternative land use from the point of view of the economics of land degradation for various zones and countries are considered.
1000-2000 words
A.Sorokin А.Kucher Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia
VI. Society responses In Chapter 6, it is desirable to reflect the current policies and plans of all countries in the Eurasian region. Proposal to prepare a summary table with a list of national plans, programs that are adopted in the EA countries of the region related to the fight against desertification, land degradation and drought (DLDD) and SSM to achieve land degradation neutrality (LDN) and the sustainable development goals.
8000-12000 words
Focal Points
6.1. Sustainable land management policies, institutions and legal framework 6.1.1. Sustainable soil management policy and institutional and legal framework 6.1.2. National and regional programmes and action plans to support the achievement of LDN goals (with a focus on improving soil fertility and reclamation, expanding innovative approaches, technologies and practices
2000-3000 words
G.Khasankhanova А. Chervan А.Kucher T.Laktionova S.Baliuk M.Zakharova
46
of SSM) 6.1.3. Soil and land resources database, including online land use and fertilizer management systems 6.1.4. Monitoring (cadastre, conditioning of lands, inventory, certification, valuation)
6.2. Scientific maintenance 6.2.1. Methodological guidelines, recommendations and manuals on management and use of saline soils, knowledge products and training modules for target groups, etc. 6.2.2. Research on soil fertility management, mitigation of salinization and soil conservation, integrated catchment management, etc. 6.2.3. Environmental assessment of climate change impacts on soil quality and productivity and agroecosystem services. 6.2.4. Information and technology support through agroecological modeling and decision support system developing for land-use agroecological optimizing
Include authors from Russia, Belorussia, South Caucasus, Central Asia I. Vasenev
6.3. Components of a sustainable soil management system Management of nutrient regime of soils Reducing soil erosion Control of soil salinization Agriculture management Water management Pollution control and soil remediation
2000-3000 words
S.Baliuk K.Kulov N.Miroshnichenko V.Kolyada А.Fateev M. Romashchenko
6.4. Improving soil management and use: successful results and lessons learned in the EA region Land-use planning Watershed management of small rivers Environmental approaches to sustainable land use Reclamation and restoration of degraded soils Climate-sustainable management
3000-4000 words
T.Trifonova R. Truskavetski
6.5. Advisory support and extension service to enhance sustainable soil management: - Training courses and trainings for farmers and local communities using INRMFFS, PLUD approaches and other FAO tools - Academic courses and extension services at universities and colleges (experience of Russia, Kazakhstan) - Restoration and reclamation of degraded soils (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Uzbekistan, etc.) - Strengthening the potential of human resources and strengthening the capacity of soil institutions (Kazakhstan, etc.)
1000-2000 words
H. Ahmadov S.Baliuk A.Levin
VII. Research and development priorities - development of climate sustainable and innovative management systems - approaches and methods of dissemination/replication of SSM technologies and integration into global knowledge bases WOCAT, ISRIC etc. (Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia) - the transfer of traditional technologies suitable to local conditions - generation of GIS-based information on land and soil fertility regulation - development of capacity for forecasting and transfer of scientific results in the practice of planning and replication on a large scale
2000-3000 words
S.Baliuk P.Krasilnikov I.Mosoi G.Khasankhanova
List of references
25000-46000 words /125000-230000 characters /3-6 “author sheets”