MAGIC PARTICIPATORY SEMINAR REPORT WATER-ENERGY-FOOD NEXUS IN GRAN CANARIA

Date: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 from 8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.

Place: Facilities of the Technological Institute of the Canary Islands in Pozo Izquierdo Beach - Santa Lucía.

Horizon 2020 Societal challenge 5:

Climate action, environment, resource efficiency and raw materials

Table of Contents

1. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................ 3

2. ANALYSIS AND OBJECTIVES PRIOR TO THE PARTICIPATORY SEMINAR ..................................................... 4

3. METHODOLOGY DEVELOPED DURING THE PARTICIPATORY SEMINAR .................................................... 5

4. RESULTS OF THE PARTICIPATORY SEMINAR .......................................................................................... 10

O MAIN IDEAS EXPOSED DURING THE DELIBERATION ................................................................................................ 10 O INTERNAL (LOCAL) AND EXTERNAL (TO GRAN CANARIA) DRIVING FORCES THAT WOULD HELP MAKING THE DESIRED SCENARIOS

VIABLE ................................................................................................................................................................. 14 O PROPOSAL OF ACTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE POSITIONED SCENARIOS ............................................................. 16

ANNEX 1: EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANTS AND COLLECTED OPINIONS ......................................................... 20

1. Background

MAGIC is a European project funded by the Horizon 2020 program, led by the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), in which different partners participate at community and regional level. In the case of the Canary Islands, the Technological Institute of the Canary Islands (ITC) is the partner in charge of developing the case studies in this Spanish region, whose head is Dr. Baltasar Peñate Suárez, head of the Water Department. The UAB and the Joint Research Center (JRC) of the European Commission collaborate in this work.

Among the different case studies selected for the development of the project is the use of alternative waters (desalinated and reclaimed water) for agricultural purposes in the islands of Tenerife (area of agricultural influence downstream of the urban wastewater treatment plant in Valle Guerra ) and Gran Canaria (Southeast Region), as well as its technical and social viability.

Image 1 Presenting the case study

The general objective of the project is to analyze the interrelation of the elements that make up the Water-Energy-Agriculture / Food nexus, through the application of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Currently, the project is in the participatory phase, in which we have integrated different actors from both islands in the evaluation and validation of the information that has been obtained so far.

The following chapters describe the methodology used and the results obtained during this participatory seminar, to which key actors from the Gran Canaria ecosystem and the study area in particular were invited.

2. Analysis and objectives prior to the participatory seminar

From the interviews and surveys carried out, it was detected that there is a broad social consensus on the island about the usefulness and benefits of the implementation of alternative water resources, such as desalination and reclaimed water. Beyond the specific problems presented by the use of these waters (quality, price, effects on soils, availability, etc.) there are debates regarding more general aspects, such as the insular agricultural model and the distribution of these waters at medium levels. and high on the island. These two general aspects constitute central axes that enable or hinder the development and future implementation of alternative waters.

To analyze these axes in greater depth, the intervention and participation of different island actors that have specific knowledge about them is necessary. Therefore, from the project it was proposed to carry out a workshop in which, through three discussion and evaluation groups, different perspectives on the aforementioned problems were obtained.

In summary, the general objective of the workshop was to evaluate the role that alternative waters can play in achieving different scenarios relevant to the Southeast region of Gran Canaria and, by extension, to the island of Gran Canaria.

As specific objectives, the following stand out:

1 - analyze the viability and desirability of narratives that currently draw possible futures regarding the use of alternative waters in Gran Canaria, or to correct scenarios that are considered unfeasible or undesirable.

2 - propose actions to take steps towards the most viable and desirable scenarios, or to correct unfeasible and undesirable trajectories.

Viability means possibility, that is, the perception or demonstration that a scenario can become a reality because factors that prevent it do not exist in the present and with current knowledge. The viability is analyzed through indicators of cost-benefit, environmental impact, social impact, etc. as well as local and expert knowledge.

Desirability means expectation, that is, the perception of a scenario as a favorable change for a person, agent or society. Desirability is a qualitative aspect that is revealed through dialogue with the actors.

3. Methodology developed during the participatory seminar

The event is attended by 31 people and the profile of the attendees is as follows:

Profile of attendees by sector Academic-Research: - ULPGC, Applied Economic Analysis. - Canary Islands Institute of Agricultural Research. - ITC Renewable Energy Department. - ITC Water Department. - Department of Phytosanitary Residues of the ITC. - Canarian Institute of Food Quality. - ULPGC, Veterinary and Animal Production.Public Administration, Town Halls, Cabildo: - Agriculture, Cabildo de Gran Canaria. - Ingenio City Council - Department of Agriculture. - D.G. Agriculture Government of the Canary Islands. - Environment Cabildo de Gran Canaria. - Agrarian Extension of the Cabildo de Gran Canaria. - Commonwealth of the Southeast. - Insular Council of Energy of Gran Canaria. - Insular Council of Water of Gran Canaria. Farmers, operators of agricultural or water infrastructure:- Bonny S.L. - Soslaires Canarias S.L.Associations, Collectives, End User: - La Carrucha Verde Agroecological Association. - Alborinco - Economy of the Common Good. - Farmers from the Southeast coast. - COAG (Coordinator of Farmers and Livestock Organizations). - Herequia Acequia Alta de Sardina.

To open the event, ITC made an institutional presentation of the event. Then, the Project team made a brief introduction to the MAGIC Project and the case study of Gran Canaria.

Next, the most relevant results from the interviews and field-level surveys carried out within the framework of the Project were presented, as well as the exposure of data from public sources. This information was available as support material for the participants during the subsequent deliberation.

During the Seminar, the attendees were divided into three working groups that analyzed the following aspects, with the aim of exploring the feasibility and desirability of different scenarios identified from the narrative analysis:

ñ Group 1. Possibility of continuing with the current production model, mainly concentrated on the coast and destined for export, as well as water use in agriculture combining and / or mixing different natural and alternative resources. What are the main strengths and weaknesses of the current model? What does it contribute to the region? What challenges do you have?

ñ Group 2. This group analyzed the potential of alternative waters to transform the agricultural model in the study area and, by extension, throughout the island. By transformation of the agricultural model we were referring here to the role that alternative waters can play in promoting production for the internal market, self-supply and food sovereignty. What type of agriculture is viable and desirable for this model? How can alternative waters boost it? Are there other limiting factors to consider besides water?

ñ Group 3. This group discussed the potential and viability of irrigation at medium and high levels with desalinated and reclaimed waters with the objective of consolidating and expanding agricultural production and activity in mid-sized areas. Why do you want to irrigate at high levels? Who needs that water and what type of agriculture is it intended to promote? If a series of problems are not solved at low levels (water quality, soil, etc.), will these same problems be extended to the medians? How can you cover the cost of rising water?

Imagen 2 Image of the first working group during the debate (deliberation)

Imagen 4 Image of the third working group during the debate (deliberation)

Imagen 3 Image of the second working group during the debate (deliberation

Each group had the following panel printed in A0 to structure the discussion in four quadrants. The horizontal axis would divide opinions within the framework of viability, and the vertical axis between desirable or not desirable concepts. In this sense, several topics were discussed within each scenario. For each topic that was discussed, each member of the group could write one or several post-its to collect their ideas and opinions about it.

Figure 5 Viability and desirability panel

The working groups would form their panels based on how the participants perceived each of the scenarios presented. The facilitators of each group had the mission of ordering the debate, encouraging the participation of all the attendees and making sure that the opinions that emanated from each intervention were brought to the fore, a step prior to bringing them to the pooling.

Figure 6The three panels of viability and desirability once the work of groups is finished

At the end of the group work, two representatives from each group presented the conclusions worked that were discussed among all the participants together. Starting from this debate, a common exercise was finally made to propose actions, actors and driving forces for the future of the nexus with alternative waters in the Southeast Region. The aim was to seek proposals for actions among the participants, identifying the responsibilities of those actors on the island who should carry out the changes. The following issues were taken into account: What role does alternative waters play in this future? How to make this scenario viable considering the A-E-A nexus? What block of the three workers considered tractor of the other two? Or, even, what block of the three workers is an indispensable condition for the other two to occur? To perform the exercise of driving forces (internal and external) / actions / actors, the participants were again divided into groups of three or four people, working on the four factors exposed in the panels. To finalize the event, the General Director of Territorial Policy of the Government of the Canary Islands and the ITC Manager closed the event. Attendees were asked to fill out an event evaluation survey, as well as the information provided by the MAGIC team for research purposes. All this information, the ideas and solutions presented have been collected in this document, which was shared after the participatory seminar, with the intention that participants can review its content and remember the proposals.

4. Results of the participatory seminar

o Main ideas exposed during the deliberation From group 1 the following agreed ideas were obtained, as well as various conclusions:

Group 1: Continuation of the current agricultural and alternative water use model

Attendee Profile: - COAG (Coordinator of Farmers and Livestock Organizations) - D.G. Agriculture Government of the Canary Islands - CIAGC - Insular Council of Aguas de Gran Canaria - CIAGC - Insular Council of Aguas de Gran Canaria - Environment Cabildo de Gran Canaria - ITC Water Department - ULPGC Veterinary and Animal Production - Bonny S.L. - Soslaires Canarias S.L. - Alborinco - Economy of the Common Good - Farmer in the Southeast coast - University of Las Palmas de Gran CanariaDEBATE

- The aquifer has stabilized, and the water table does not continue to fall. However, the water table has remained low and is difficult to recover because fossil waters have already been consumed. Regarding the quality of groundwater, there are important challenges ahead to achieve a good state, not only nitrate pollution but also emerging contaminants that are being detected. - It is considered important to include the waters of the springs of mine waters. - With respect to reclaimed waters: use can be increased and thus contribute to recovery, but these waters also bring challenges. - Great evolution in terms of the use of reclaimed waters, the current waters have a surname, they are not those of before, they have improved a lot with the tertiary ones, but economic investments are needed. Agriculture can withstand it if crops are better paid, but if the buyer does not support it, it is difficult. - Current strategies: improve training and technical advice on water management, especially reclaimed water, which has many challenges in terms of quality and its adaptation to crops. - Consumers should take care of the origin of the water. - Actual water costs are not borne by agriculture but are supported by public aid because the purchase chains do not support the price increase. If there is no regulation of the water market it is unfeasible to bear the costs. In addition, if the food market is not regulated, an increase in costs cannot be supported. - Current agricultural model: differentiate between local and export. The place would be sustainable if it is questioned how it is being done, also for export. The

export is inflated by subsidies and aid, no realism is applied to the cost of the product. - Sustainability: To sustain what is needed is to change local agricultural policies. The hospitality industry could get involved and consume local instead of through the "dock". You cannot grow in agriculture without a market and without regulation that supports local production covering a minimum of production. - Agricultural policies: the CAP has to adapt to the local reality and stop subsidizing to export and then import and sink the local market. - Soil destructuring requires joint management in terms of soil-water quality to correct impacts. The integration of livestock in this management is essential since it provides organic fertilization.

This group brings to the plenary as a conclusion of their participatory work, the following proposal for a desirable future scenario related to the use of alternative resources in the current model of agricultural exploitation:

Management of available resources is made with a focus on training and technical advice to farmers and

citizenship education.

From group 2 the following agreed ideas were obtained as well as various conclusions:

Group 2: Transformation of the agricultural model with alternative water resources. Attendee Profile: - Agrarian Extension of the Cabildo de Gran Canaria - Economy of the Common Good - ITC Water Department - Department of Phytosanitary Residues of the ITC - Herequia Acequia Alta de Sardina - Canarian Institute of Food Quality - Representative of Ayto. Ingenio - Department of Agriculture - Farmer in the Southeast area - Commonwealth of the Southeast - Island Council of Aguas de Gran Canaria DEBATE

- There is an obvious cultural problem. It is important to change the language: from ecological to fairer. - It is necessary to involve the consumer. - It is not necessary to reach 100% in food sovereignty. - There is talk of intermediaries and the relevance of setting appropriate prices. - The use of local products, the local seal and the difference between an organic product (being imported) and / or "organic + local" is discussed. - It also comments on the need to train chefs to diversify their products and incorporate local foods. - It is commented how little was talked about water during the debate, which focused on the quality of reclaimed water. - There was consensus on the viability of the market transformation from export to the local and water would not be the limiting factor or a problem for this transformation. - Structural problems: access to the ground, much abandoned soil, but difficult to access. In addition, agricultural profitability does not occur because it is not profitable because sales prices do not cover costs. It is no longer a decent job and farmers are looking forward to having some rest, vacations, because of hard work. - The cost of water is assumed, and you know what it is. There are irrigation techniques that adapt to low availability; therefore, this is not the main problem. - Marketing strategies: the free market hinders the local market because it puts a cheaper price than the sustainability of agriculture allows. - A different and more specific day is proposed for agricultural issues, in order to move forward in the model transition. - Livestock: there is talk of the great production of organic eggs, which can increase the level of supply. - The reclaimed and desalinated waters destined for irrigation can contribute several tons of salts / hectare per year, which can accumulate in the soil and affect the productivity of the crops (specific toxicity). There are very tolerant crops and others very sensitive to certain salts (for example, citrus, avocados and beans are very sensitive to certain salts, such as chlorides, sodium, etc.). Such damage to crops as a result of the accumulation of salts can be observable in the medium and long term. In addition, the potential Salinity must be taken into account for both Reclaimed and Desalinated waters destined for irrigation. After the precipitation of the less soluble salts (bicarbonates, etc.), Chloride and Sulfate ions remain in solution, significantly increasing the osmotic pressure in the crops (Salinity), which can reduce productivity.

From this group the proposal for a desirable future scenario of transformation of the agricultural model with the use of alternative resources is obtained as a conclusion of its participatory work:

Towards a local product with a profitable price that does not depend on intermediaries, a more diverse agriculture

and livestock with fair trade channels. From group 3 the following agreed ideas were obtained as well as various conclusions:

Group 3: Irrigation with alternative waters in medium and high levels. Attendee Profile: - Agriculture, Cabildo de Gran Canaria - ULPGC, Applied Economic Analysis - Herequia Acequia Alta de Sardina - Ingenio Town Hall - Canary Institute of Agricultural Research - Island Council of Energy of Gran Canaria - Island Council of Aguas de Gran Canaria - ITC Renewable Energy Department - La Carrucha Verde Agroecological Association

DEBATE

- There are many factors that explain the abandonment of agriculture in medians. And water is not appreciated as the most important. - The group highlights that it is more profitable to urbanize than to cultivate. In addition, productive agricultural land is subject to IBI. It is grown in areas of medians as long as there is a commitment to water availability. In addition, the economic profitability of medium-sized crops must be interpreted under other considerations to what is done in large crops on the coast. The need to regulate the water market and land use in the area is stressed. - The profitability of cultivating in mid-sized areas should meet the general interest in terms of food sovereignty, climate change, sea level rise, etc. Agroforestry approach: carbon fixation, soil regeneration, biodiversity protection, horizontal rain retention, etc. - It is necessary to generate local demand for agricultural products and livestock to boost agriculture at high levels with agricultural products of added value (crop zoning and cooperativity between farmer and end user). Professional farmers are needed in medians and not just weekend farmers. - It is agreed that the variable of raising alternative waters to medians should be assessed only if necessary. At present there is no guarantee of water supply (of any kind) in the medians, nor is there a forecast to have recourse in reservoirs. Sewage control to the coast is necessary to preserve existing resources.

- The need / obligation to present natural resources at high levels and not to lower the waters of the medians to the coast (below level 300) is exposed. And it would be a commitment to keep indoor wastewater in elevation to be treated in situ (with unconventional systems as a priority) and make them available to middle-class farmers. The purified waters should not go down to get back up treated. The decentralized purification in medians is a better option compared to the conventional model of promoting sanitation collectors that centralize purification in large plants. - In the scenario of water need in the middle, there is hydraulic infrastructure normally to assume pumping. What should be addressed is how to reduce operating costs. The use of surplus wind energy existing on the island / Southeast to pump desalinated water is proposed. The capacity of reservoirs would serve as a regulator in elevation. - The existence of negative effects of alternative waters on the soil is perceived, but the scenario of not cultivating is perceived as a more negative situation. Cultivation is preferred, even if it implies an impact on the soil. - Training is needed for farmers to minimize and work on the impacts detected. - The km0 product strategy would allow the existing and collected water in the medians to remain in the medians.

From this group, the following proposal is obtained as a conclusion of their participatory work to reach a future scenario that would make it possible to make the scenario of maintaining the waters of natural origin at its height and elevate alternative waters to medians for agriculture only in case of need:

It is necessary to make economically viable agriculture in the middle to give a quality product considering the

possible contribution of renewable energies for pumping

o Internal (local) and external (to Gran Canaria) driving forces that would help making the desired scenarios viable

The following illustrates the external and internal factors that the participants considered to be relevant in order to enable the three desired scenarios:

DRIVING FORCES EXTERNAL

What factors external to the Canary Islands can contribute?

DRIVING FORCES INTERNAL

What internal factors to Gran Canaria can contribute?

Consumption: • Production and consumption based on viability in the Canary Islands. • Consumer trend to buy km0 products, fair trade.

Region: • The Canary Islands have the potential to provide solutions. • Agroclimatic conditions. • Value added by the canary himself. • Demand for local products for tourism. • Available land / land (abandoned and in medians). • Internal and external tourism.

Agricultural Markets: • Create agricultural export markets. • New market niches with high added value (local consumption). • Take into account competition with third countries. • Take care of the frequency of shipping lines with containers.

Water: • Existence of water to supply the crops. • Sufficient infrastructure to maintain irrigation. • Desalination with renewable energy. • Well articulated heritages.

Political changes: • Political implementation. • Reform of the R.E.A.'s policies • Changes in European policies (agricultural and water).

Energy: • Use surplus energy to boost water. • Desalination with renewable energy. It has the potential to provide solutions.

Changes of legislation: • Regulations that favor the profitability of the product or local production. • Climate Change Law.

Farmers, technicians, consumers: • They need to have a global vision of what is happening. • It is necessary to share knowledge and experiences. • Union of farmers and ranchers (in cooperatives). • Technical advice and agricultural training. • Knowledge of the environment (agricultural production). • Social responsibility of farmers. • Investment in technical assistance. • Public awareness and education. • Training courses in agricultural matters.

• There are organizations that train specialists in agriculture and water. • Qualified technicians available and trained farmers. • Available grants (Cabildo and Government of the Canary Islands).

Climate change: • Carbon Footprint Compensation. • Water Footprint Compensation. • Mobilizations against climate change. • Awareness towards the fight against climate change.

Market: • Promotion of direct sales and markets. • Local / ecological / sustainable product stamps. • Knowledge of local brands. • Transparency and improvement in access to import data from agricultural and livestock producers, to the Canary Islands.

Subsidies: • Take into account existing subsidies. • Necessary subsidies for local commerce. • Support of existing European subsidies for producers.

Tourism: • Tourists must have knowledge of local products. • Tourism awareness about the Canarian environment.

Investigation: • Use of laboratories (Waste Laboratory). • Analyze what it means to have a greater risk of shortage of resources.

o Proposal of actions for compliance with the positioned scenarios

In order to make the scenarios that have been obtained from each group viable, a series of actions to be undertaken are proposed by the attendees. Schematically they are summarized in the following table in different thematic blocks:

ACTIONS

What should be done to reach the scenarios?

Machinery and products:

• Implementation and development of agricultural machinery.

• Optimization of phytosanitary products and application.

Costs:

• Reduction of farm operating costs.

• Tax incentives for local products.

• Tourism -> promote local consumption.

Use of resources (water and land):

• Existence of constant and quality water.

• Put all land to use.

• Guarantee the “regularity and water rate”.

• Desalination of desalinated water with surpluses of EERR towards medians.

• Hydrological planning that avoids “lowering” waters to medians at coast and vice versa.

• Encourage decentralized purification and use of reclaimed water in medians.

• Optimization of water consumption in an agricultural holding (water and energy are saved).

• The use of soil moisture sensors.

• Use of organic padding (reduce Evaporation).

• Better adjustment of irrigation dose based on evapotranspiration data adjusted to each region thanks to weather stations.

Information and training:

• Local consumer awareness and general training.

• Inform the farmer and farmer.

• Local product dissemination campaigns.

• Promote and raise awareness about the importance of local product consumption (km0) or at all levels (schools, institutes, etc.).

• Education / awareness campaigns.

• Soil formation (basic soil disclosure).

• Culture of technical consultation.

• Basic water disclosure in Gran Canaria.

• Importance of the consumer.

• Take into account FAO guidelines on local agriculture.

• Real advertising companies (awareness).

• Conduct studies and training on marketing channels.

• To improve the contributions of organic matter to the soil due to its great capacity to retain moisture, etc.

• Avoid “blanket” irrigation.

• Improve / pipe ducts with large losses in transport and distribution.

• Control Potential Salinity.

• Monitoring of cultivated soils irrigated with Reclaimed and Desalinated Waters to study the possible accumulation of certain salts (Chlorides, Sodium, Sulfates, Boron, Etc.).

• Review of production and consumption models.

• Access to information on agri-food products to encourage the creation of agricultural enterprises

• Be attentive to the problem regarding the type of quality of the reclaimed waters (which the CIAGC currently supplies) and which represent a limitation when planting certain vegetables.

• That the scientific-technical knowledge about the use of these waters does not remain in the institution, but that they reach the farmers.

Agricultural Markets:

• Promote direct sales, create a public marketer.

• Promote local markets with stable prices, according to real product costs.

• Generate a local product brand / stamp to identify nearby km0 products.

• Create a marketing platform with stable prices -> regional.

• Take care of the frequency of shipping lines with containers.

• Improve marketing channels.

• Exchange intermediaries for intermediaries.

• Create nearby, alternative marketing channels, from farmer to consumer.

• Retake municipal markets.

• Guaranteed participation in the commercialization and implementation of deviations.

Annex 1: Evaluation of participants and collected opinions

The results of the collected evaluations of the event that have allowed to know the opinion of the participants about the day and the information shared during it are

exposed. The following table shows the percentage of satisfaction regarding the survey questions:

PREGUNTAS SATISFACCIÓN1 Convocatoria al Evento 91,00%2 Contenido y temática de la jornada 92,00%3 Organización de la jornada 98,00%4 Metodología participación propuesta 86,00%5 Contribución de los resultados de cara a su beneficio profesional/personal 83,00%6 La jornada, ¿ha dado respuesta a las expectativas que tenía puestas? 89,00%7 Valoración general diagnóstico presentado 87,00%8 Valoración de las narrativas identificadas 84,00%9 Valoración datos cuantitativos analizados 82,00%

10 Valoración si el diagnóstico presentado ayudó para la deliberación en los grupos11 Valoración info impresa distribuida para la deliberación en los grupos12 Opinión, sugerencias respecto a información a utilizar en futuros seminarios

SATISFACCIÓN GENERAL 88,00%

General oinions and suggestions

Recibir información antes del evento hubiera sido positivo. Enfocar más la temática. La metodología dentro del grupo de trabajo podría haber sido más clara y concreta. No hubo método. Proponer a las Administraciones Públicas los cambios propuestos en el seminario. Bastante instructiva. Que la jornada tenga continuidad con una nueva edición más adelante, en la siguiente fase del proyecto.

El tema es muy amplio, creo que sería interesante trabajar temas más concretos, desde esta perspectiva multi-enfoque. Me ha gustado el formato y la metodología de participación, creo que ha sido un acierto. Las jornadas muy positivas y enriquecedoras, más necesarios de cara al futuro. Contribuyen para abrir un debate social necesario. Que no quede en buenas intenciones, sino que trascienda a políticas concretas

Muy interesante conocer el nexo de unión entre todos los temas tratados. Ahora tocaría el siguiente paso que sería formar a la gente en cómo optimizar los recursos en nuestras tierras de cultivo. Comercialización. Abordar realidades del suelo. Agua: Energía y soluciones. Ley Agraria y protección de suelos. Contacto periódico con los agricultores. Recordatorios para buenas prácticas.

El nivel de debate ha sido excelente. He aprendido y me llevo un buen argumento. Sugiero ampliar la participación a agricultores y ganaderos relativas a los temas del agua, normativa, tecnología, comercialización. Curso de hortalizas y frutales subtropicales. Curso de regeneración del suelo. Curso de análisis de agua. Regulación de importación. Seguridad y constancia sobre el precio.

Buen guion para el trabajo en grupo de cada uno de los grupos. Quizás faltan más representantes de la base del sector y representantes de la administración pública (político de turno). Quizás seguir organizando seminarios como este.

Opinions and suggestions towards the methodology followed Pregunta 6

Ser más estrictos con la metodología.n.a.Sé que es un poco difícil, pero sería importante reducir un poco el tiempo del seminario, muchas horas.Sugiero toda la información que se disponga sobre las cuestiones nunca relacionadas con quedar bien. Sea la que sea decirlaEnviar la información por correo 2 días antes para analizarla previamente y poder aportar mas.En las presentaciones gráficas más grandes que se puedan leer bien los ejes x,y. Tiempo para asimilar dicha información, bien enviándola antes por mail o entregándola a cada participante antes de empezar.

Continuidad.Creo que hubiera sido deseable entregar datos (tablas y gráficos) con la información más relevante antes incluso del seminario.n.a.Faltaron algunos actores clave: más agricultores, más representación de Aytos., MercaLaspalmas...

Que la información preliminar, que genera unas conclusiones técnicas de gestión, conlleve a que haya cambios reales, para que no se quede en un encuentro más. El tema de la gestión del agua es fundamental en Canarias y con ella se pueden impulsar políticas imprescindibles.

Incluiría dos ponencias de expertos: una sobre la calidad de las aguas y resultados en aplicaciones a la agricultura y otra sobre un análisis coste-beneficio de subir agua a distintas cotas (aunque se habló, pero con mayor detalle de los distintos costes y beneficios), al igual que aspectos y obstáculos técnicos a salvar. Estaba pensando con esto en el tema de la elevación de aguas a medianías, pero la reflexión vale también para los otros puntos.

Continuar con las encuestas a personas claves implicadas directamente, ya que la información recabada es de gran valor.Mayor claridad en los datos expuestos y vincularlos a las narrativas.Disponer de ella previamente.

Las Jornadas me parecieron muy buenas y organizadas, lo que me gustaría que las conclusiones de las mismas, no sólo lleguén a la parte técnica, sino que lleguen a niveles más altos de decisión, administraciones (Cabildo y Gobierno).