3.3 Perception of stakeholders about land policy frameworks and
land degradation
Perception of stakeholders about land policy frameworks and land
degradation is important to assess the potential to mitigate the
problem. Interviewed stakeholder groups represent key individuals or
institutions that are instrumental in addressing land degradation. Of
total interviewees, 45% were female and 55% were male. Most of the
interviewees were farmers/ forest owners (33%), but also public
companies (17%) and representatives from the local government (15%)
and academia (13%). Most of the interviewees did not migrate during or
after the War (75.00%), but from the interviewed refugees from another
Entity, most were land owners/users (13.75%), whereas decision makers
(7.50%) and representatives from non-government sector (3.75%) were in
smaller number.
Only 13.3% of the interviews were not familiar with the term land
degradation, embracing mainly land owners/users (Q4 in supplementary
material). But the majority of those with knowledge about land
degradation do not have many details about its drivers and impacts
(60%), despite most of them are decision makers. Furthermore,
considering global policies and commitments of BIH related to land and
soil, 60% of responders had never heard about UNCCD, most of them
included in the farmers/users stakeholders’ group (33%), followed by
decision makers (21%) (Q10 in supplementary material). In addition,
62,2% of the responders had no knowledge about land degradation
neutrality.
Stakeholders have identified several drivers of land degradation in BIH,
including (i) soil erosion, floods, and torrents, (ii) overexploitation
of forests in erosion prone areas, (iii) week implementation of existing
policy or deficient policy framework, and (iv) overuse of chemicals in
agriculture (Q8 in supplementary material). Nevertheless, most of the
interviewees reported to never been affected by any kind of land
degradation (58%) (Figure Q7 in supplementary material).
Perceptions toward existing policy frameworks that addresses land
degradation is not considered appropriate, mainly among the land
owners/users and non-government sector (Q5 in supplementary material).
It is interesting to record that most of the decision makers are
satisfied with the existing framework (25% vs 10%). Also, respondents
reported on different gaps and challenges in existing land related
policy framework (Q6 in supplementary material), identifying the weak
implementation of existing frameworks as the main challenge (38%), as
well as the need to improve the existing policy framework (28%).
Regarding the need of new rules and legislation to mitigate land
degradation (Q9 in supplementary material), most respondents point out
the need just to implement the existing ones (28%), but also to develop
local strategic documents for land use planning (14%) and a law on
pesticide use (14%).
Policy design processes are not sufficiently coordinated, because land
owners/users, unlike decision makers, mostly do not participate in these
processes since they are not interested (Q12 in supplementary material),
and would not like to participate in future design of a policy framework
(Q13 in supplementary material). Nevertheless, most stakeholders (62%)
reported a willingness to participate in future policy design,
particularly decision makers.
It is curious that only a limited number of stakeholders, mostly land
owners, know and use incentives available at the entity or local levels
for sustainable land management (SLM) (4%) (Q14 in supplementary
material). About 47% of the interviewees have never heard about these
incentives, while 29% of the farmers/users do not apply for the SLM
incentives in their production.
Based on the questionnaire survey, the current awareness and knowledge
of land degradation is not sufficient. The majority of the interviewees
(82%) reported the importance of education and awareness raising
campaigns as a mean to understand the drivers and impacts of land
degradation, and measures to mitigate the problem (Figure Q15).
Traditional agriculture in BIH is still dominant and stakeholders have
distinct perceptions about its impact on soil quality, with 54% of the
respondents (mainly from non-government sector) considering to have
negative impacts, and 46% identifying positive impacts on soil, mainly
land owners/users (Figure Q16). Informally, during discussions performed
during the questionnaires, some stakeholders identified different
agriculture practices that are traditional but not sustainable, such as
uncontrolled use of chemicals, shortage of manure usage, soil compaction
due to heavy mechanization, cropland monocultures and land
fragmentation. Stakeholders also identified possible reasons of land
degradation, such as low education and awareness about sustainable land
measures that will also provide economic support for households, because
so far agriculture is not economically attractive in RS, people are
generally reluctant to adopt new approaches and techniques. It was
interesting that some stakeholders reported that land users not owning
the seem to care less about degradation problems.