Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy

Transcription

1 Nethelands Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy W 69 Cop poduktion potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities V : Qualitative suitability assessment fo foesty and fuit cops H.A.J. van Lanen, C.M.A. Hendiks and J.D. Bulens Bib[iotheek Wetenschappelijke Raad voo het Regeingsbeleio Plein 1813 n JN 's-gavenhaw Postbus EA 's-gavenhage Telefoon toestel o~oiio\;,-.,.?;...l,,.: -,,q:,,,:,,-<,- <"UI 1x3 :~Q,~~III~~UGI.:~~ Plem 1813 n JN 's-gavenhage.. The Hague, Mach 1 i!.

2 Exemplaen van deze uitgave zijn te bestellen bij het Distibutiecentum Oveheidspublikaties, Postbus 20014, 2500 EA 's-gavenhage, doo ovemaking van f 10,- op gio 751 dan wel schiftelijk of telefonisch ( ) onde vemelding van titel en ISBN-numme en het aantal gewenste exemplaen. This Woking Document can be odeed at "Distibutiecentum Oveheidspublikaties", P.O. Box 20014, 2500 EA The Hague, by paying f 10,- on gio 751 o by lette o telephone ( ) in mentioning title and ISBN-numbe and the numbe of copies you want to have.. ISBN Publikatie van de Wetenschappelijke Raad voo het Regeingsbeleid (WRR), Postbus 20004, 2500 EA 's-gavenhage (tel ) (Publication of the Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy).

3 CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGE PREFACE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 QUALITATIVE PHYSICAL LAND EVALUATION PROCEDURE 2.1 Basic pinciples 2.2 Automated Land Evaluation System, ALES Intoduction Database Knowledge base Evaluation domain Softwae and hadwae configuation 3 DATA 3.1 Soils 3.2 Climate 3.3 Data pocessing and data flow between the GIs and ALES 4 DETERMINATION OF COMPETITIVE LAND 5 SUITABILITY FOR FORESTRY AND VARIOUS FRUIT CROPS 5.1 Foesty Evaluation citeia Suitability fo foesty 5.2 Rainfed and iigated fuit tees Evaluation citeia Suitability fo fuit 5.3 Rainfed and iigated citus Evaluation citeia Suitability fo ainfed en iigated citus 5.4 Olives Evaluation citeia Suitability fo olives 5.5 Gapes Evaluation citeia Suitability fo gapes 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

4 APPENDIX List of woking documents of poject on 'Poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities' Land chaacteistics deived fom the EC soil map Land chaacteistics associated with climate Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo fast gowing tee species Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo nomal gowing moe demanding tee species Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo nomal gowing less demanding tee species Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo fast gowing tee species and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo fast gowing tee species o one of the othe cop types Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo nomal gowing, moe demanding tee species and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo nomal gowing moe demanding tee species o one of the othe cop types Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo nomal gowing moe demanding tee species and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo nomal gowing, moe demanding tee species o one of the othe cop types 10 Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo ainfed fuit tees 11 Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo ainfed fuit tees and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo ainfed fuit tees o one of the othe cop types 12 Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo iigated fuit tees 13 Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo iigated fuit tees and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo iigated fuit tees o one of the othe cop types 14 Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo ainfed citus 15 Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo ainfed citus and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo ainfed citus o one of the othe cop types 16 Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo iigated citus 17 Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo iigated citus and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo iigated citus o one of the othe cop types 18 Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo the cultivation of olives in a low input poduction system Page

5 Page 19 Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo olives and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo olives o one of the othe cop types; cultivation of olives in a low input poduction system 20 Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo the cultivation of olives in a high input poduction system 21 Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo olives and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo olives o one of the othe cop types; cultivation of olives in a high input poduction system 22 Suitability of NUTS-1 egions fo ainfed cultivation of gapes 23 Competitive land, common unsuitable land fo ainfed gowing of gapes and some othe cop types in the NUTS-1 egions (% of aea of NUTS-1 egion) as well as land only suitable fo gapes o one of the othe cop types FIGURES Geneal outline of the land suitability evaluation pocess (adapted fom Dent and Young, 1981) Main components of ALES linked to a GIS Relational diagam fo assessing the physical suitability using ALES Decision tee fo the qualitative evaluation of land on limitations of the land quality soil aeation Schematic outline of the situation of land chaacteistics, infeable land chaacteistics, land qualities, and decision tees Distibution of the elative aea coveed by the dominant soil units within the Euopean Communities Oveview of the data pocessing fo the qualitative evaluation pocedue using ALES and a GIs Possible configuations of suitable land in a NUTS-1 egion fo two diffeent cops Example of a compound land evaluation unit with non-nested suitable land TABLES 1 Desciptions of some selected land units (AUEs) as used by ALES 2 Desciptions of some soil chaacteistics fo selected land units (AUEs) as used by ALES 3 Desciptions of some climatic chaacteistics fo selected land units (AUEs) as used by ALES 4 Suitability classes and type of limitations as assessed with ALES fo some selected land units (LEUs) 5 Relative aeas (%) coveed by the suitability classes as assessed with ALES fo some selected land units (LEUs)

6 Page 6 Example of the outcome of the module ALES-ANLY Results of the nesting pocedue fo some selected land evaluation units 45 8 Results of the nesting pocedue fo some selected NUTS-1 egions 46 9 Decision citeia fo evaluating soil wate deficit fo fast gowing tee species Decision citeia fo evaluating soil wate deficit fo nomal gowing moe demanding tee species Decision citeia fo evaluating soil wate deficit fo nomal gowing less demanding tee species Decision citeia fo evaluating soil aeation fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species Decision citeia fo evaluating fetility of land fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species Decision citeia fo evaluating chemical conditions of land fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species Decision citeia fo evaluating tempeatue effect on foest gowth Decision citeia fo evaluating management conditions of foest land fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing, less demanding tee species Total aeas (km2) and pecentages (8) of suitability classes fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species fo the Euopean Communities Total aeas (km2) and pecentages (%) of suitability classes fo fast gowing tee species fo the membe counties of the Euopean Communities Total aeas (km2) and pecentages (%) of suitability classes fo nomal gowing moe demanding tee species fo the membe counties of the Euopean Communities Total aeas (km2) and pecentages (%) of suitability classes fo nomal gowing less demanding tee species fo the membe counties of the Euopean Communities Summay of geneal climatic and soil citeia to evaluate EC land fo the cultivation of fuit tees Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo ainfed fuit tee gowing Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo iigated fuit tee gowing Standad figues fo apple and pea poduction on suitable Dutch soils (deived fom Joosse, 1990) 85

7 Page 25 Summay of additional climatic and soil equiements to evaluate EC land fo citus fuits 26 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no o slight limitations) modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo ainfed citus fuits (100% unsuitable land occus in the non-mentioned counties) 27 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no o slight limitations) modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo iigated citus fuits (100% unsuitable land occus in the non-mentioned counties 28 Summay of climatic and soil equiements used to evaluate EC land fo olive gowing 29 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable, and unsuitable land fo olive cultivation; low input system 30 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable (modete limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo olive cultivation; high input system 31 Summay of climatic and soil equiements used to evaluate EC land fo gape gowing 32 Aea of land (% of the county) with no, slight, modeate, and sevee limitations fo gape-gowing fo commecial puposes 9 1 MAPS 1 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo fast gowing tees thoughout the EC 2 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo nomal gowing moe demanding tees thoughout the EC 3 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo nomal gowing less demanding tees thoughout the EC 4 Relative aea of the land evaluation units coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo fast gowing tees thoughout the EC 5 Relative aea of the land evaluation units coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo nomal gowing moe demanding tees thoughout the EC 6 Relative aea of the land evaluation units coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo nomal gowing less demanding tees thoughout the EC 7 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no limitations fo ainfed cultivation of fuit tees thoughout the EC 8 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no limitations fo iigated cultivation of fuit tees thoughout the EC

8 9 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo ainfed cultivation of citus fuits thoughout the EC 10 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no o modeate limitations fo iigated cultivation of citus fuits thoughout the EC 11 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no limitations fo the cultivation of olives thoughout the EC; low input system 12 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no limitations fo the cultivation of olives thoughout the EC; high input system 13 Relative aea of the NUTS-1 egions coveed by land with no o slight limitations fo ainfed cultivation of gapes thoughout the EC

9 ACKNOWLEDGE The digitized maps and some attibute data used in ou study wee kindly supplied in a compatible fom by the CORINE poject team (DG XI, Commission of the Euopean Communities, Bussels). The suppot of M M.H. Conaet and M J. Maes was invaluable. Meteoconsult B.V. in Wageningen povided ecods of histoical weathe data fom many meteoological stations within the EC. D D.G. Rossite (Conell Univesity, New Yok State, USA) povided majo suppot by expanding the database of the expet knowledge system, ALES. Valuable data on cops wee povided by colleagues at the Cente of Agobiological Reseach (CABO) in Wageningen.

10 PREFACE The Nethelands Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy has asked the Winand Staing Cente in Wageningen to investigate the cop poduction potential of the ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. The Council needed this infomation fo a poject on the possible futue developments in the ual aeas of the EC as a esult of an ongoing gowth in agicultual poductivity. To get a clea view the Council exploed the possible changes in the ual aeas. When exploing possible developments o options it is cucial to define the objectives at stake. Within agicultue not only poduction is of impotance, but also (egional) employment, emissions of pesticides and nutients to the envionment, impact on the landscape, etc. Land use is taken as the key facto in the exploations by the Council. Tough diffeent types of land use diffeent goals can be attained. The exploations show the diffeences in possible futue land use when a cetain pioity is given to the vaious objectives. Infomation on the physical possibilities fo land use was absolutely necessay to cay out the exploations. A team fom the Winand Staing Cente consisting of I J.D. Bulens, I A.K. Begt, I C.A. van Diepen, I C.M.A. Hendiks, I G.H. de Koning and I G.J. Reinds lead by D I H.A.J. van Lanen compiled this infomation. A epot of thei eseach is given in a seies of five sepaate documents unde the common title "Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Community". The seies consists of: I : GIs and datamodel (W65) I1 : A physical land evaluation pocedue fo annual cops and gass (W66) I11 : Soils, climate and administative egions (W67) IV : Potential, wate-limited and actual cop poduction (W68) V : Qualitative suitability assessment fo foesty and peennial cops (W69) The full epot shows that a combination of Geogaphical Infomation Systems and simulation models can povide useful quantitative infomation on cop poductions potentials fo diffeent cops at diffeent locations. With this appoach the Winand Staing Cente opened up a new and pomising line of eseach. Pof.D I R. Rabbinge

11 SUMMARY Intensification of agicultue in the past 25 yeas has esulted in a suplus of agicultual poducts in the Euopean Communities (EC). Many of the intensively cultivated aeas ae suffeing fom goundwate pollution and soil degadation. In othe ual aeas, less-endowed fo agicultue, abandonment is occuing. These developments ae focing policy-makes to eoient policies on ual land management. In this context, the Dutch Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy (WRR) is developing a model fo the geneal optimal allocation of land use (GOAL) to exploe possible egional land use options within the EC. The GOAL model equies data on the egional poduction potential of vaious agicultual activities at diffeent levels of input. In this epot, the poduction potential is given fo some peennial cops as fa as it is affected by biophysical esouces, i.e. soils and climate. A qualitative physical land evaluation method was applied to assess the poduction potential of these cops. This implies that the potential is expessed in a desciptive way, e.g. suitability classes of well suitable land, modeately suitable land, o unsuitable land. Insufficient cop data pevent futhe quantification in tems of cop yield and equied amounts of nutients and wate as done by quantitative physical land evaluation. The cops consideed include foest tees and fuit tees. Accoding to the timbe poduction capacity the foest tees wee subdivided into thee goups of tee species, i.e. fast gowing tee species, nomal gowing moe demanding tee species, and nomal gowing less demanding tee species. Possibilities fo gowing fuit tees wee evaluated in two diffeent ways. Fist, a boad analysis was caied out consideing only geneal soil and management equiements which apply to most fuit tees. Next, fuit tees with moe specific equiements, i.e. citus, olives and gapes wee analysed. Two diffeent input levels wee distinguished fo the fuit tees, such as ainfed and iigated. The poduction potential of gapes, howeve, was consideed fo the ainfed situation only. Expet knowledge on cop and management equiements, which is chaacteistic of qualitative physical land evaluation, was captued in a compute system. The Automated Land Evaluation System, ALES, was applied to convet the expet knowledge into decision ules. These ules define how the land chaacteistics of the mapping units should be evaluated taking into account the equiements of a paticula cop. The expet knowledge system was linked to a geogaphical infomation system (GIs). Soil and climatic data of the thousands of land evaluation units wee etieved fom the GIs and stoed in the database of the expet knowledge system. Subsequently, land evaluation was caied out by the expet knowledge system fo each of the units. Then, the esults wee tansmitted to the GIs and futhe pocessed to allow poduction of maps and tables showing distibution o aeas of suitability classes in the EC. Maps and tables wee made fo diffeent spatial aggegation levels, such as NUTS-1 egions, EC membe states and the whole EC. The complete infomation system with its modules, patly implemented on a PC and patly on a VAX, is descibed.

12 One of the modules allows land units which ae suitable fo moe cops to be estimated, which implies that the cops might have to compete fo this land in some land use scenaios. The GOAL model needs data on this so-called competitive land in ode to allocate efficiently. The evaluation shows that about 30% of EC land was evaluated to be suitable fo fuit tees consideing geneal applicable equiements only. Individual fuit tee species with additional equiements cove smalle suitable aeas, of couse. No moe than 2% of the EC is suitable fo heat-demanding cops, such as citus. This aea applies to ainfed conditions; when iigation is assumed to be used the suitable aea inceases to about 6%. Unde ainfed conditions commecial gape gowing can be done on about 15% of EC aea, wheeas the suitable aea fo olives was assessed to be about 25% fo a low input system. Fo a high input system poducing olives, slightly less of EC land is suitable, i.e. 22%. Fo most foest tee species a simila aea as fo fuit tees is suitable (30%). The nomal gowing less demanding species ae an exception, the suitable aea fo this goup coves about 50% of the EC. The esults fo the individual membe states and the NUTS-1 egions show that suitable land fo the peennial cops consideed is non-unifomly distibuted thoughout the EC. Heat-demanding cops can only be cultivated in the southen egions, of couse. Fo the non-heat demanding cops suitable aeas in the nothen membe states ae usually lage than in the southen membe states. Dought susceptibility, slopes and soil physical quality (e.g. soil textue, soil depth, stoniness) stongly affect the distibution of suitable land in the EC. In lowland egions, usually high pecentages of the suitable land ae competitive fo two o moe cops. In egions with land located on slopes, the aea only suitable fo peennial cops is geneally lage than fo annual cops because of the highe demands of the annuals. Futhemoe, in egions with stony soils, potential is highe fo peennial cops than fo some annual cops, i.e. oot cops. The esults pesented in this epot give a fist impession of the suitability of EC land fo some peennial cops. Results can be impoved by additional gatheing of soil data, such as the aeas and land chaacteistics of the associated soil units. Data fom moe meteoological stations should also be made accessible. Futhemoe, cop and management equiements should be futhe efined.

13 1 INTRODUCTION The Common Agicultual Policy (CAP) of the Euopean Communities (EC) has stimulated agicultual poduction to such a level that supluses of some majo commodities, such as wheat, suga, milk, and wine has become stuctual. In aeas favouable fo agicultue, fam size has inceased, naow cop otations have been intoduced, and lage amounts of elatively inexpensive agochemicals and feedstuffs ae being used. The intensification of agicultue in these egions has detimentally affected the envionment, natue and landscape (Biggs and Wilson, 1987). In aeas less favoued fo agicultue, the abandonment of land and associated social hadship occus. EC funds ae inceasingly called upon to mitigate the undesiable socio-economic and envionmental effects of the CAP. Howeve, little o nothing is known about the cost-effectiveness of investments fo agicultual development in the vaious EC egions in elation to the long tem pespectives. Theefoe, the Nethelands Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy (WRR) has stated a poject on the possible developments of the ual aeas in the EC. Diffeent land use scenaios will be evaluated in tems of thei impact on ual development, taking into account agicultual, socio-economic, envionmental, and physical planning aspects. The WRR will develop and apply a model fo the Geneal Optimal Allocation of Land use (GOAL). This model uses a method known as Inteactive Multiple Goal Linea Pogamming. Fo the pupose of this model the WRR equies, among othe input data, infomation about the egional poduction potentials of majo cops at diffeent input levels. At the equest of the WRR, the Winand Staing Cente has investigated the physical cop poduction potential of ual aeas in the EC. The yield potential of some indicato cops, when gown on majo land units suitable fo agicultual use, was detemined by a combined use of physical land evaluation methods and a Geogaphical Infomation System (GIs). Quantitative physical land evaluation methods ae based on compute models simulating soil wate balance, cop gowth, and cop poduction. The cop poduction potential fo foest tees and fuit tees, such as olives, gapes and citus, was detemined by a qualitative physical land evaluation appoach. Fo these peennial cops a quantitative evaluation pocedue could not be used because of insufficient cop chaacteistics. The qualitative physical land evaluation appoach poduces desciptive expessions fo the poduction potential of EC land (e.g. well suitable, modeately suitable land). The qualitative evaluation method is based on expet knowledge, which is captued in a compute system.

14 This woking document deals with the qualitative land evaluation applied to foest tees and fuit tees. In Chapte 2 the physical qualitative land evaluation pocedue is explained. Fist, the basic pinciples will be pesented. Then, the way the expet knowledge was pocessed is descibed. An essential tool in this context is the expet system famewok, ALES. The expet knowledge is implemented in a compute system using the Automated Land Evaluation System (ALES). ALES povides an expet system famewok within which land evaluatos build thei own expet systems to evaluate land. The famewok was developed at Comell Univesity (Rossite, 1989; 1990). The use of ALES allows land evaluatos to concentate on thei coe esponsibility, viz. the collection of expet knowledge fo a cetain land use type. The time-consuming application of the expet knowledge to the land units is left to the compute. The use of ALES in ou study was essential owing to the many land evaluation units occuing within the EC. The conventional application of qualitative evaluation by hand was beyond the scope of ou study. In Chapte 3 the soil and climatic data used ae pesented. Types of esults ae pesented, and examples of input files.ae given. Futhemoe, the data pocessing and subsequent data flow between the GIs, implemented onto a VAX 3600, and ALES, implemented onto a PC, ae discussed. In Chapte 4 the pocedue is pesented which was applied to detemine which land units ae suitable fo moe cops ('competitive land'), and which units ae only suitable fo one paticula cop and not fo anothe. Futhemoe, the pocedue indicates which land units ae unsuitable fo the cops consideed. Suitability fo foesty and fuit tees is extensively discussed in Chapte 5. The esults ae pesented sepaately fo each goup of timbe species, o fuit cop. Fist, the soil and climatic equiements ae given. Then, the suitability esults ae pesented. Suitability is expessed as a pecentage of the aea of geogaphic units coveed with well suitable, modeately suitable, and unsuitable land. Few esults ae pesented fo land evaluation units, being geogaphic units on the lagest map scale. Fo pesentation easons, most suitability esults in this epot ae given fo geogaphic units on smalle map scales. These scales compise the EC administative EEgions at NUTS-1 level, the EC membe states, and the whole EC. Futhemoe, attention is mainly esticted to the esults on smalle map scales, because the abovementioned GOAL model has been designed fo input at the NUTS-1 level. Chapte 5 stats with the desciption of the esults fo foesty. The suitability assessment fo foesty is subdivided into sepaate evaluations fo fast gowing, and nomal gowing tee species. The latte goup is futhe subdivided into moe demanding and less demanding tee species. Afte foesty, the suitability evaluation fo a boad goup of fuit tees is pesented. In that section, no esults fo specific fuit tee species ae pesented. Land is evaluated fo a numbe of common equiements demanded by many fuit tee species (e.g. demands fo available soil wate, soil dainage conditions). Howeve, no paticula tempeatue equiements of individual fuits cops ae taken into account. We have assumed that in evey EC egion with land suitable fo this boad goup of fuit tees, one o moe fuit tee species with appopiate poduction can be gown. The suitability fo the boad goup of fuit tee species is discussed fo both ainfed and iigated conditions. Afte the suitability

15 assessment fo the boad goup of fuit tees, evaluation esults fo paticula fuit tee species with specific equiements ae dealt with. Suitability of EC land fo citus fuit is given because it could be a majo fuit cop in those egions of the EC expected to have limited possibilities fo othe agicultual puposes. Potentials and constaints of EC land fo citus gowing is given fo ainfed and iigated conditions. Afte citus, the suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of olives is discussed. A subdivision is made between a low and a high management level. Finally, the suitability of EC land fo gape gowing fo commecial puposes is descibed. The desciption of the esults fo each cop is concluded by poviding infomation on how fa the suitable land fo that cop is also suitable fo othe cops ('competitive land'). In Chapte 6 some pespectives of the cops consideed, the data used and esults obtained ae descussed. In this context the eliability of the esults is also touched upon. This woking document is one of a seies of documents on the SC poject "Cop Poduction Potential of the Rual Aeas within the Euopean Communities". The titles of the othe woking documents ae pesented in appendix 1. The documents ae summaized in a few othe publications (Begt et al., 1989; Bulens et al., 1990; van Diepen et al, 1990; van Lanen et al., in pess a; van Lanen et al., in pess b).

16 2 QUALITATIVE PHYSICAL LAND EVALUATION PROCEDURE Fist, the basic pinciples of the qualitative physical land evaluation pocedue ae explained. In the pocedue used in ou study, the application of the Automated Land Evaluation System (ALES) is essential. This expet system famewok is descibed in a sepaate section. 2.1 Basic pinciples Land evaluation is the pocess of suitability assessment of land fo a specified kind of land use. Possibilities fo land use types such as high input aable faming, o gowing of paticula tee species can be exploed. The pincipal pupose of land evaluation is to pedict the potentials and constaints of land fo land use change (Dent & Young, 1981). The pinciples of land evaluation ae compehensively descibed by FA0 (1976). Ideally, land evaluation stats with the selection and desciption of one o moe land use types (LUTs). At fist, the fomulation of the LUTs can be elatively vague (Fig. 1). Based on the LUTs, cop and management specific equiements (LURs). ae defined; this implies a chaacteization of what the land should offe. Futhemoe, equied inputs (such as labou, fetilize) and expected outputs (such as cop yield, o timbe poduction) ae descibed in this phase. Then, elevant land qualities (LQs) ae selected, which ae deived fom a combination of land chaacteistics (LCs). LQs povide infomation on what the land units offe. In the suitability evaluation accoding to FA0 standads land is not evaluated as a whole, but is split up into LQs and LCs. In a matching pocedue, LQs of each land unit ae compaed with the LURs in ode to obtain an oveall suitability assessment of the land unit fo each of the LUTs consideed. Besides an estimate of the poduction potential, the oveall suitability includes an assessment of the envionmental impact. This oveall suitability has a povisional status, because the LUTs have to be investigated fo equied modifications. These modifications could include eithe adapted LURs o land impovements which, of couse, incease the costs of the intended land use change, but which impove one o moe LQs. Afte modifying the LURs o the LQs the next iteation step in the evaluation pocess is conducted. This leads to a futhe efinement of LUTs, LURs, LQs and oveall suitabilities as the numbe of iteations inceases. Finally, acceptable esults ae obtained, which include the final desciption of the LUTs and the oveall suitability of the land units fo each of these LUTs. The oveall suitability, which is deived fom the seveity levels of the LQs, is usually based on the limitation method, although othe methods ae available (Dent and Young, 1981). This pocedue, which is analogous to Liebig's Law of Minimum, takes the lowest individual seveity level of the LQs consideed as limiting to the oveall suitability. The suitability evaluation is pefeably concluded with a field check of the estimated suitability.

17 OBJECTIVES ---- land use change 1 I 1 0 v 3( Y I NATURAL f IMPROVEMENTS j RESOURCES - I I ' I I - I LAND CHARAC- I TERISTICS I AND QUALITIES I I I I LAND USE TYPES LAND USE REQUIREMENTS * ITERATION COMPARISON OF LAND USE WITH LAND - matching - envionmental impact - field check t LAND SUITABILITY ,----,A ITERATION I I I I I I PRESENTATION FINAL RESULTS Fig. 1 Geneal outline of the land suihbility evaluation pocess (adapted fom Dent and Young, 1981) One of the peequisites of FA0 standads is that the LUTs selected must be elevant to the physical, economic, and social content of an aea. This implies that a pope land evaluation should integate biophysical and socio-economic esouces. The above-mentioned FA0 standads have been indicated as the FAO-famewok. fo land evaluation (FAO, 1976). The FAO-famewok itself does not contain an evaluation system, but is a set of pinciples and concepts though which local, egional o national evaluation systems can be constucted. Usually in land evaluation pojects only pats of the FAO-famewok have been used. Fo instance, even some majo FA0 pojects (FAO, 1978) have concentated on physical aspects of land only against a simple socio-economic backgound. Futhemoe the poposed iteation pocedue (Fig. 1) has often been omitted. This

18 appoach was also applied in ou study. The LUTs consideed, e.g. iigated citus gowing o olive gowing in a low management poduction system, wee usually fully defined at the beginning of the land evaluation. This means that the complete evaluation pocedue was caied out only once. A field check was beyond the scope of ou study owing to the still stong exploatoy natue. The essence of land suitability evaluation is the compaison of LQs with the LURs of the vaious kinds of land use fo which the land might be suitable. A seveity level of a LQ fo a land unit indicates the degee of limitation of that paticula unit fo the defined land use. When no limitations ae evaluated, it means that the LURs ae fulfilled. Chaacteistic desciptions of the seveity levels ae, fo instance, no o slight limitations, sevee o exteme limitations. Land evaluation accoding to the FAO-famewok uses expet knowledge based on fames' expetise, supplied with field expeience of elationships between LQs and fam outcome o the output of woodlots. The knowledge can be collected in the field, but can also be deived fom the liteatue. The latte appoach was followed in ou study. The compaison of LQs with LURs fo each land unit can be conducted using elatively simple technical pocedues. These pocedues, howeve, yield less specific answes. The esults ae expessed in a desciptive way, e.g. modeate limitations, o highly suitable land. Results ae not futhe quantified. Because of the type of answes which ae associated with the undelying technical pocedue, these methods ae indicated as 'qualitative' physical land evaluation pocedues (van Lanen, 1991). 2.2 Automated Land Evaluation System, ALES Intoduction The applicability of land evaluation accoding to FA0 standads was substantially inceased by the intoduction of compute technology in land evaluation duing the eighties. Wood and Dent (1983) demonstated the combined use of compute databases and expet knowledge implemented in a compute system to evaluate land suitability fo a numbe of specific cops and tee species unde topical conditions. Simila evaluation systems but fo othe cops and envionments have been established by many othes, as mentioned by van Lanen (1991). All these evaluation systems contain knowledge on atings fo land qualities and oveall suitability fo specific cops in ago-climatic zones. Thei tansfeability is limited because the expet knowledge only applies to conditions fo which the systems wee developed. A moe vesatile way of evaluating land accoding to FA0 standads is the Automated Land Evaluation System (ALES). The famewok was developed at Conell Univesity (Rossite, 1989; 1990). This system in itself contains no knowledge, but offes the oppotunity to captue it quickly. The expet models fo foest tees and fuit tees wee built with ALES.

19 ALES allows the integation of biophysical and socio-economic esouces in the land evaluation to be conducted. In ou study, ALES was only used to evaluate the physical esouces. We did not need to take advantage of the ability of ALES to pefom economic evaluation. ALES ecognizes thee main components, viz. a database, a knowledge base, and an evaluation domain (Fig. 2). ALES also povides facilities to impot data on land chaacteistics, and to expot suitability esults to geogaphical infomation systems. Futhemoe, many othe use-fiendly options ae available; a detailed eview is given in the use's manual (Rossite and Van Wambeke, 1989). Rossite (1989; 1990) eviews main pinciples and featues of ALES. digitized climatic map digitized soil map land chaacteistics - digitized administative egions - land chaacteistics fo LEUs 2_ 3 physical suitability fo LEUs C Stoing land chaacteistics in DATA BASE Fomulating ALES decision tees KNOWLEDGE BASE EVALUATION physical suitability fo geogaphic units - -ps - tables Fig. 2 Main components of ALES linked to a CIS Database li. Land can only be evaluated if the land chaacteistics ae accessible. In the ALES concept the chaacteistics ae stoed inside the ALES configuation. Theefoe, facilities ae available fo ceating a database. The data on land units can be enteed fom the keyboad. Anothe option is to impot the data fom extenal databases. This option was elevant fo ou study, because we wee coping with thousands of land units and associated land chaacteistics. Moeove, the data wee aleady stoed in a database (Reinds et al., in pep.). Besides land chaacteistics fo the land units, ALES equies a definition of the units. When a land unit is specified to be compound the homogeneous subunits (constituents) must be povided. Moeove, the pecentage of the compound unit made up by the subunits should be given.

20 The ability of ALES to cope with compound land units was elevant fo ou study because almost all land units consideed ae compound. Howeve, we did not use the above-mentioned option of specifying compound units because we only had data on the ange of soil textues and slopes within a unit (Reinds et al., in pep.). This type of data can be handled in anothe way by ALES. ALES offes a second option of consideing compound land units, i.e. by specifying multivalued (pobabilistic) land chaacteistics. This means that fo a land chaacteistic multivalues instead of single data values ae enteed. Fo example, a land unit can be defined as being 60% coase-textued and 40% medium textued. In this case ALES distinguishes two subunits, which ae sepaately evaluated and combined at the end. In the evaluation domain (Fig. 2), ALES can only use land chaacteistics expessed in classes. These so-called class chaacteistics (Bouma and Van Lanen, 1987) ae eithe defined by a specified naow ange of values (e.g. a textue class), o by a symbol (e.g. hoizon designation). In the database continuous land chaacteistics can also be stoed fo a land unit, such as the pecentage of slope o tempeatue. Howeve, fo futhe pocessing, ALES equies these data to be conveted into analogous class chaacteistics. Theefoe, the numbe of classes and class limits need to be specified fo these continuous chaacteistics. Land chaacteistics obtained in this way ae indicated as 'commensuate land chaacteistics' (Rossite and Van Wambeke, 1989). Moe details on the data stoed in the ALES' database ae povided in Chapte 3, whee the impot and expot of data ae also explained Knowledge base ALES povides an expet system famewok, o 'shell', within which land evaluatos build thei own expet models to evaluate land. In fact, this famewok is the coe of ALES (Fig. 2). Model building stats with a definition of the land use types (LUTs) consideed (step 1, Fig. 3). When only a physical land evaluation is caied out fo one cop, as done in ou study, the main infomation to be povided fo each LUT is the land use equiements (LURs) which need to be consideed (step 2, Fig. 3). Fo instance, a LUT might impose cetain equiements to aveage minimum tempeatue in the peiod Octobe to Apil. In this stage of model building, the numbe of so-called seveity levels should be defined. These levels expess the degee to which the qualities of the land (LQs) fulfil the LURs. A LQ indicates what the land can offe in a paticula sense, e.g. tempeatue egime. When a LQ completely fulfils the LUR, a situation with no limitation occus. Convesely, a sevee limitation is allocated to land when exteme conditions pevail. Intemediate seveity levels ae also defined to evaluate intemediate conditions. Afte'selecting the LURs, and defining the coesponding LQs in tems of numbe and desciption of seveity levels, a decision tee is fomulated fo each LQ (steps 3 and 4, Fig. 3). These tees ae stuctued epesentations of a easoning pocess necessay fo eaching decisions. Decision ules ae the key factos of the knowledge

21 base to be built into ALES by the modelle. Fo instance, the LQ soil aeation could be deduced fom the land chaacteistics (LCs) soil dainage class, soil textue, and annual pecipitation deficit (e.g. Van Lanen and Wopeeis, in pess). This elatively simple decision tee is pesented in Figue 4. LAND USE OPTIONS 6 p k q land use land use LAND RESOURCES + I Selecting I I (land mapping units elevant land land chaacteistics) chaacteistics 3 PHYSICAL SUITABILITY Fig. 3 Relational diagam fo assessing the physical suitability using ALES Finally, the oveall physical suitability fo a cetain LUT is infeed fom the seveity levels of the LQs (step 5, Fig. 3). Usually, the maximum limitation method was applied in ou study, as mentioned in the pevious section. The disadvantage of this appoach is that the evaluation focuses on one paticula LQ, i.e. the LQ imposing the stongest limitation. Othe limitations ae not taken into account. Fo example, land with a numbe of modeate limitations might be less suitable than land with only one modeate limitation fo a LQ. Theefoe, ALES allows a moe sophisticated physical suitability assessment to be applied. A decision can be made which enables the land evaluato to deduce the physical suitability fom the seveity levels of all LQs. This appoach was applied fo foesty in ou study.

22

23 Thus, the decision tees, which ae chaacteistic fo captuing expet knowledge, can be used at seveal places in the pocess of assessing the physical suitability with ALES (Fig. 5). As mentioned above, a decision tee (DT3 and DT4, Fig. 5) can be applied to deive a seveity level fo a LQ fom LCs. Futhemoe, a decision tee can be defined to infe the suitability fom the LQs (DT5, Fig. 5). Of couse, ALES also allows the LQ fom one LC only to be deduced (DT2, Fig. 5). In fact, this implies that when assessing physical suitability, both LQs and LCs can be used. ALES also povides the option of deiving a cetain LC fom othe LCs (DT1, Fig. 5). Van Lanen et al. (in pess c) has classified this type of LC as an infeable land chaacteistic (ILC). So, eadily available LCs can be elated to an ILC which is moe difficult to obtain. Fo instance, the ILC soil bulk density may deived fom LCs soil textue, oganic matte content, and hoizon designation. Usually, class pedotansfe functions (Van Lanen and Bouma, 1987) ae applied to elate LCs and ILCs Evaluation domain Evaluations using ALES can be executed when data ae stoed in the database, and decision ules captued in the knowledge base. Of couse, all land units and LUTs can be evaluated at any one time. But, ALES also allows the specification of paticula land units and LUTs to be evaluated. The esults of ALES ae pesented as a table; the columns epesent the diffeent LUTs and the ows the land units. The esults compise, fo instance, seveity levels of LQs and oveall suitabilities. The esults can be pesented on a sceen, but can also be diected to a pinte o to a file on disk. A valuable option in the evaluation domain is the 'Why inteface'. This inteface infoms the evaluato why a paticula esult has been obtained fo a land unit. The decision tees used and the land chaacteistics consideed ae pesented. The inteface also pemits the land evaluato to edit decision tees o land chaacteistics. Duing the model building stage, the availability of a 'Why inteface' is extemely efficient Softwae and hadwae configuation ALES softwae was witten with the so-called MUMPS language (DataTee, 1986). MUMPS is a pocedual language with a built-in database manage. Linguistically, it is a hybid of LISP and BASIC, with the added featue of spase, hieachical, diskbased aays as the main data stuctue. Accoding to Rossite and Van Wanbeke (1990), MUMPS will neve be a majo pogamming language. The main easons being the intoduction of moe sophisticated database languages, and linguistically supeio pocedual languages. The type of language used does not pemit the enty of fomulas into ALES. This implies that no calculations can be pefomed inside ALES. Computations must be executed outside ALES, and esults may subsequently be impoted.

24 LAND CHA RAC TERISTICS INFERRABLE LAND CHARACTERISTICS LAND QUALITIES PHYSICAL SUITABILIN Fig. 5 Schematic outline of the situation of land chaacteistics (LCs), infeable land chaacteistics (ILCs), land qualities (L.Qs), and decision tees (DTs) LC ALES was developed fo a PC envionment. To un ALES, it equies at least 384 kilobytes of pimay memoy, and pefeably 640 kilobytes. The pogam, its suppot files and a minimal database need 2.25 megabytes of space on had disk (Rossite and Van Wambeke, 1990). In ou study with a elatively lage database we used slightly less than 10 megabytes on had disk. Futhemoe, anothe 10 megabytes wee necessay fo eithe a system-wide backup o to compess the database. An evaluation fo one land use type and all the evaluation units of the EC (about 2760) lasted about 40 minutes on a PC/AT.

25 3 DATA The data used fo qualitative land evaluation using ALES ae discussed in this chapte. The data ae only biefly discussed because they ae extensively eviewed by Reinds et al (in pep.). In this volume, the emphasis is on adaptions equied fo ALES. Futhemoe, only data on soils and climate ae explained. The data concening administative egions ae only touched upon because they have no biophysical significance. Hence, they do not affect the suitability itself. Administative egions ae, howeve, used indeed fo the pesentation of the suitability esults. In the last section, the data pocessing and subsequent data flow pocesses between the GIs and ALES ae discussed. 3.1 Soils The qualitative land evaluation was based on the EC Soil Map, scale 1 : (CEC, 1985). The map consists of 3 12 diffeent soil associations. When soil phases, such as the gavelly phase o lithic phase, ae included the numbe of associations inceases to 546. These associations ae distibuted ove about map delineations. Each of the soil associations contains a dominant soil unit, one o moe associated soils, and one o moe inclusions. The associated soils usually cove less than 50% of the aea of a soil association, and moe than 10%. Inclusions cove less than 10% of the aea of a soil association. In addition to the geogaphical location of the soil associations, soil chaacteistics wee equied fo the physical land evaluation. Examples of soil chaacteistics ae: soil textue and soil dainage. As aleady mentioned by Reinds et al. (in pep.), soil chaacteistics wee only available fo the dominant soil units of the associations. A boad analysis of the elative aea coveed by the dominant soil unit of each soil association demonstated that about 60 associations (20% of total) have a dominant unit which coves less than half the aea of the association (Fig. 6). One thid of the soil associations has a dominant soil unit which coves 75% o moe of the aea of the association. All dominant soil units togethe cove moe than 60% of the EC aea. It should be ealized that some of the associated soils o inclusions do not functionally diffe fom the dominant unit. Fo example, a diffeence in base satuation (eutic vesus dystic soils) between the dominant soil and associated soils may not seiously affect the suitability assessment. This applies to most land use types of ou study. Futhemoe, the numbe of dominant soil units, viz. 78, is significantly lowe than the numbe of soil associations. This implies that the dominant soil unit of a cetain soil association is an associated unit of anothe association. When these associations occu in the same ago-climatic egion, the suitability esult of the fome association also applies to pat of the aea of the latte association. As a fist appoximation, we assumed that the esults fo the dominant soil unit also av~lv to the aea of a soil association coveed bv associated soils and inclusions.

26 pecentage Fig. 6 Distibution of the elative aea coveed by the dominant soil units within the Euopean Communities This elatively cude assumption needed to be made because data fo associated soils and inclusions fo the EC soil associations ae still lacking. When soil chaacteistics become available fo the associated soils and inclusions the outcome may be futhe efined. The land chaacteistics available fo each dominant soil unit have been extensively discussed by Reinds et al. (in pep.). The following chaacteistics wee pocessed fo stoage into ALES' database: alkalinity, base satuation, pesence of calcium cabonate, pesence of gypsum, cation exchange capacity (CEC), soil dainage,, oganic matte content, soil phases, maximum ooting depth, salinity, slope, and soil textue of the topsoil. Fo these chaacteistics the numbe of classes, codes, and desciption of the classes ae given in Appendix 2. Fo most dominant soil units a ange of soil textues o slopes is specified in the legend of the soil map instead of just a single value. So, these units have a compound

27 natue. Fo example, on the soil map a Rc3/4bc occus, which involves an aea of land coveed by a dominant soil unit classified as a Calcaic-Regosol (Rc) with a medium fine (3), aid a fine soil textue (4), and which is located on modeately steep (b), and steep slopes (c). In fact, fou diffeent subunits may occu (Reinds and van Lanen, in pep.). Because data on the extent of these subunits ae not yet available, we assumed that subunits cove eaual vans of the aea of the soil association. Of couse, this assumption must be consideed as a fist appoximation which needs futhe efinement. Data pocessing of the land chaacteistics to obtain a fomat accessible fo ALES is futhe discussed in Section Climate Besides soil conditions, the physical suitability of land depends on the pevailing ago-climatic conditions. Hence, an ago-climatic map was compiled, compising 109 ago-climatic egions. A epesentative meteoological station was allocated to each zone, assuming no climatic vaiation within the zone. We assumed that most agicultual activities occu unde lowland conditions. Theefoe, in mountainous egions a station was selected that was epesentative of valley conditions.this assumution might vovide too favouable conditions fo highe elevations, which could esult in an oveestimation fo less-demanding land use types (e.g. some tee species). In the qualitative evaluation, we used long-tem mean monthly weathe data fo each ago-climatic egion as land chaacteistics. These mean data wee obtained in two diffeent ways. Fist, fo 80% of the egions the means wee computed fom 26 yeas of ecods of monthly weathe data. The histoical weathe data wee equied fo anothe study, which included yea to yea weathe vaiation (De Koning et al., in pep.). Second, fo the emaining 20% of the egions the means wee taken diectly deived fom the liteatue. Reinds et al. (in pep.) povides an extensive eview of the selection of the stations, thei chaacteistics, and eplacement of missing values. The long-tem mean monthly weathe data, which could be stoed in ALES, compised minimum tempeatue, maximum tempeatue, global adiation, wind speed, vapou pessue, ainfall and numbe of ain days. Mean daily tempeatue was deived fom minimum and maximum tempeatues. Moeove, mean annual pecipitation deficit was computed, which is defined as the diffeence between the monthly potential evapotanspiation of a efeence cop and ainfall. Only the values of the months with a deficit wee used (Reinds et al., in pep.). Not all these mean values wee impoted into ALES in ode to keep the ALES database manageable. Only land chaacteistics which wee elevant in tems of climatic equiement of the tee species and fuit tees wee stoed.

28 u I FILE: 7 I Codes Desciptions - Aeas fo AEUs FILE: 8 - Soil attibutes I FILE: 9 - Climatic attibutes fo AEus I - codes I I Climatic attibutes I VAX compehensive FILE: 10 I - Suitabilities and type of limitations fo AUEs I - AEU codes and LUT codes I A L ~ ~ ~ ,,,,-J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ FILE: 11 - AEU codes I -Suitabilities and ALES - ANLY type of limitations I fo AUEs ALES - JOIN \ 1 C FILE: 12 -=ode=.. - Aeas fo LEUs - Suitabhties NEST I t I FILE: 14 cndes - 'Competitive' land -Common unsuited land fo NUTS - 1 egions FILE: 13 Aeas of land coveed by suitability classes with type of limitation fo vaious geogaphic units Fig. 7 Oveview of && pocessing fo the qualilative evaluation pocedue using ALES and a CIS 34

29 All the land chaacteistics associated with climate have a continuous natue (Section 2.2.2). This implies that the numbe of classes and class limits had to be specified. These items wee selected depending on the climatic equiements of the cops to be evaluated. Some majo land chaacteistics associated with climate ae given in Appendix 3. Data pocessing of the land chaacteistics in ode to obtain a fomat accessible fo ALES is discussed futhe in the following section. 3.3 Data pocessing and data flow between the GIs and ALES Land evaluation models built with ALES do not have a spatial efeence (Fig. 2). Each land unit is evaluated independently of the geogaphical locations of the delineations belonging to the unit. Geogaphical efeences of the unit's delineations, howeve, wee needed because the pevailing combinations of soils and climates within the EC needed to be known fo a pope suitability assessment. Futhemoe, eventual physical suitability fo the vaious cops had to be pesented fo the 64 EC administative egions, the so-called NUTS-1 egions (NUTS: Nomenclatue des Unites Teitoiales). So, it was necessay to know the delineations of combinations of soils and climate occuing in a NUTS-1 egion. Hence, the geogaphical distibution of soils, climatic egions, and NUTS-1 egions wee stoed in a geogaphical infomation system (GIs). A map ovelay was caied out using ARC/INFO softwae. This ovelay pocedue esulted in a compounded map with land evaluation units (LEUs). About 4200 LEUs wee distinguished, distibuted ove moe than delineations (Bulens et al., 1990; Bulens and Begt, in pep.). A LEU is a unique combination of a dominant soil, an ago-climatic egion, and a NUTS-1 egion. The physical land evaluation methods wee applied to these LEUs. The.GIs was implemented onto a VAX 3600 compute, wheeas ALES uns on a PC. Seveal steps wee equied to convet the outcome of the GIS and othe data into a compatible fom fo ALES, to tanspot the data fom the VAX to the PC, and to impot the data into the ALES' database (Fig. 2). Afte evaluation with ALES, data exchange poceeded in the othe diection. The outcome of ALES had to be analysed and conveted. It then had to be tanspoted fom the PC to the VAX, and, next, impoted into the GIs. Finally, the GIs allowed tables and maps to be pesented. Usually, the esults of the LEUs had to be aggegated to weighted values fo administative egions, such as the NUTS-1 egions, EC membe states, and the whole EC. A numbe of softwae modules wee witten in FORTRAN to facilitate the above-mentioned data pocessing. These modules and the data flow pocess ae explained in the following (Fig. 7). Pocessing of input data fo ALES ALES equies at least two diffeent data files. Fist, a file with the desciption of the land units. This implies a land unit code, a desciptive name of the land unit, the aea of the unit, and a code poviding infomation on whethe the land unit is homogeneous o compound. The aea is equied to eventually allow a computation

30 of total aea within a egion occuing in the diffeent suitability classes. Second, one o moe files with the code and land chaacteistics of the units must be povided. The land unit code is used fo ecognition puposes. But, is also used by ALES as a key item, i.e. it popely links data in the diffeent files with definitions and land chaacteistics. A section of the file with land unit desciptions (file 7, Fig. 7) is given in Table 1. The module ALES-INPUT was used to ceate this file. Files with soil data, names of meteoological stations epesentative of ago-climatic egions, and aeas of the LEUs wee needed to assemble the ecods (files 1,2 and 4, Fig. 7). These files wee mainly obtained by using the GIs. Fo each land, unit one ecod needed to be specified. The code of the ALES evaluation unit (AEU) contains a sequence numbe, the symbol of the dominant soil unit with infomation on soil textue and the slope, and infomation on the geogaphical location. Fo instance, 'E-n3' means the thid ago-climatic egion in nothen Spain. Table I Desciptions of some selected land units (AUEs) as used by ALES AEU code Desciptive name code') Aea (ha) ') homogeneous Some AEUs do not povide much infomation on the location, because the maximum code length is eight chaactes, and pioity was given to full pesentation of sequence numbe and the symbol of the soil unit. A sequence numbe was necessay because ALES anks the AEUs alphabetically, wheeas we wanted to follow the sequence in the legend of the soil map. A logical AEU code makes the unit ecognizable in the database and the evaluation domain. In the desciptive name the full name of the soil unit and the ago-climatic egion is specified. The code 'h' fo a unit being homogeneous was allocated to each AEU. As mentioned in Section we used anothe option of ALES to deal with heteogeneity. An impotant task of ALES-INPUT was also to define ALES land units (AEUs) which wee only unique in tems of soils and climate. LEUs, which only diffe in tems of thei location in NUTS-1 egions, wee joined in one AEU. So, AEUs ae only unique in tems of a combination of a dominant soil unit and an ago-climatic egion, wheeas LEUs ae unique in tems of a combination of a dominant soil unit, an ago-climatic egion, and a NUTS-1 egion. The distinction of AEUs educed the

31 numbe of units to be evaluated fom about 4200 to Howeve, in a late phase of the evaluation pocess, the esults of the AEUs had to be linked to LEUs. The GIs used the codes of the LEUs as a key item to elate all kinds of attibute data to the delineations on the land evaluation map. Hence, a file was ceated in which the elationship between the AEUs and LEUs was stoed (File 5, Fig. 7). In addition to a file with desciptions of the units, files with land chaacteistics had to be compiled. ALES allows stoage of the land chaacteistics in moe than one file. We stoed the soil chaacteistics and the climatic chaacteistics in sepaate files (Files 8 and 9, Fig. 7). In fact, the climatic data wee also stoed in two diffeent files. Fo easons of claity, this was not pesented in Figue 7. A section of the file with soil chaacteistics is given in Table 2. This file was ceated with ALES-INPUT. The input was etieved fom the file containing the soil chaacteistics (File 1, Fig. 7). One ecod with the land chaacteistics had to be povided fo each AEU. Table 2 Desciptions of some soil chaacteistics fo selected land units (AUEs) as used by ALES AEU code soil CEC Max. Slope Soil textue ooting dainage depth 000We2aE-n3 m I mod le il) 0025Je2aE-e5 m I mo le i 0086Jeg4aDKn f h mod le i 0108Jeg4aUKs f h mo le i 0113Jeg112aI c=5,m=.5 vl=.5,1=5 mod le i 0114Jeg112aI c=.5,m=.5 vl=.5,1=5 mo le i 0177Jcf4aGe f h md le i 018Wcf4aGe f h mo le i 0492Ie2cdP-s m I vsh most=s,st=s w 0493Ie2cdP-s m 1 vsh most=s,st=s w 0700E02/3bB- m=.5,mf=.5 I=.5,m=5 sh si w ') abbeviations efe to classes povided in Appendix 2. The codes of the classes of land chaacteistics (Appendix 2) wee used as input fo ALES. Fo instance, 'i' on the fist ecod means that this Eutic Fluvisol is impefectly dained. Instead of the codes of classes ALES also pemits the use of levels indicated by figues. Because these figues ae less meaningful duing the phase of expet model building, the codes wee used. The figues in Table 2 show these of multivalued land chaacteistics. As mentioned in Section 3.1 the dominant soil units may be chaacteized by anges in the soil textue and slope. These anges wee handled by allocating multivalued land chaacteistics to the AEUs (cf. Section 2.2.2). In the case of Gleyic Euuic Fluvisols (01 13Jeg1/2aI), 50% of the aea was assumed to be coveed with coase-textued soils (c=.5), and anothe 50% with mediumtextued soils (m=.5). The Euuic Lithosols (0492Ie2cd) wee assumed to have 50% of the land located on modeately steep slopes (most=.5), and 50% on steep slopes (st=.5). When multivalued land chaacteistics ae distinguished, ALES automatically ecognizes diffeent subunits. Othe land chaacteistics may also be multivalued, if they have been deived fom soil textue o slope (Reinds et al., in pep.). Fo

32 instance, the cation exchange capacity (CEC) has been deduced fom soil textue. Table 2 demonstates that when a multivalued soil textue occus, the CEC is also multivalued (e.g Jeg1/2aI). The input file with climatic chaacteistics (File 9, Fig. 7) was ceated with ALES-INPUT based on the input fom the files with soil attibutes and mean monthly weathe data. The file with soil data was equied because of the assemblage of the code of AEUs. The climatic chaacteistics wee povided as continuous land chaacteistics (Table 3). As mentioned above, in ALES the continuous chaacteistics wee automatically conveted into class chaacteistics when class limits ae specified. The classes and thei limits ae given in Appendix 3. Table 3 Desciptions of some climatic chaacteistics fo selected land units (AUEs) as used by ALES AEU code Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Numbe of minimum annual annual ainfall ainfall months with tempea- tempea- ain- in August in Apil- mean tempeatue col- tue fall (mm) Septembe tue between dest month (OC) (mm) (mm) (mm) 13 OC and ("(3 30 OC On the basis of geogaphical locations of the LEUs, which wee included in the codes of the LEUs (Reinds and Van Lanen, in pep.), climatic chaacteistics of the agoclimatic egions wee allocated to the AUEs. In the input fo ALES hadly any monthly weathe data wee stoed. Instead, pepocessed weathe data wee stoed, such as numbe of months with a mean tempeatue in a paticula ange, o the mean minimum tempeatue of the coldest month (Table 3). All this pepocessing was executed with ALES-INPUT. Pocedues fo pepocessing of mean monthly weathe data wee elaboated with the module CLIM-SCREEN (Fig. 7). Climatic citeia deived fom the liteatue wee confonted with the mean monthly weathe data (File 3, Fig. 7). In this way, effects of cetain citeia on cop gowth potential, as affected by ago-climatological conditions, wee investigated. Exploing these effects at an initial stage in the evaluation and outside ALES saved consideable time. Use of pepocessed weathe data was also attactive in ode to keep the ALES' database elatively small. Moeove, some pepocessing was necessay because ALES cannot pefom aithmetical opeations.

33 The input files fo ALES wee tansmitted fom the VAX to the PC envionment. Total size of the input files fo the EC was about 0.7 megabytes. Pocessing of ALES'S output ALES has vaious options fo pesenting the evaluation esults. In ou study, output to sceen o pinte was not feasible because of the size of the outcome. Hence, outcome was expoted to a compehensive file on disk (File 10, Fig. 7). One long ecod was poduced fo each evaluation unit. This ecod compises infomation on codes of AEU and LUT, suitability, and type of limitation. When suitabilities of the subunits diffe, each suitability class was pesented. Moeove, the elative aea of the class was given as well as the type of limitations. The compehensive file contains aw outcome, i.e. quotes and question maks could occu. The latte wee emoved, and the file was then tansmitted fom the PC to the VAX (File 11, Fig. 7). A section of this file is pesented in Table 4. Table 4 Suitability classes and type of limitations as assessed with ALES fo some selected land units (LEUs) AEU code Aea Suitability classes and (km2) type of limitation1) 1) suitability class: 1: well suitable (no limitations), 2: modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and 3: unsuitable (sevee limitations); tvpe of limitation: ae: soil aeation, cl: climate, top: slope, sp: soil physical quality, sf: natual soil fetility When a unit was evaluated as 'class 1 land', little infomation was povided (e.g. 2150Lo214bE-). Besides the AEU code, only the figue '1' was given. Howeve, when an unit was evaluated as having some limitations, substantially moe infomation was pesented. Especially when the unit has a compound soil textue and slope which leads to diffeent subunits, the ecod could become vey long (up to 200 bytes). Fo instance, 33% of the land of the unit of the Chomo Calcic Luvisols located in the ago-climatic egion Lisbon (2293Lkc4bdP-), was evaluated to be well suitable. Anothe 33% was assessed to have modeate limitations owing to the slope, and the emaining 34% has sevee limitations, also because of the slope. The file with the suitability data fo each AEU (File 11, Fig. 7), was used as input fo the pogam ALESJOIN. The main task of this module was to analyse the suitability data in ode to poduce a shot ecod fo each evaluation unit. The ecod compises infomation on the code of the evaluation unit, and the elative aeas of the unit occuing in the suitability classes consideed (File 12, Fig. 7). A section

34 of the file containing this infomation is given in Table 5. Some units wee evaluated as having all thei land in one suitability class (e.g C ). Table 5 Relative aeas (9%) coveed by the suitability classes as assessed with ALES fo some selected land units (LEUs) LEU code Aea Suitability class1) (km2) ') suitabilitv class: 1: well suitable (no limitations), 2: modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and 3: unsuitable (sevee limitations); Othe units with compound soil textues o slopes may have land in all the suitability classes consideed (e.g C ). The shot ecods with suitability esults wee assembled fo the LEUs instead of fo the AEUs. Theefoe, the -module ALESJOIN also used the file with the elationship between AEUs and LEUs as input (File 5, Fig. 7). So, the link of the land units with the administative egions on a NUTS-1 level was again established. Suitability esults had to be allocated to the LEUs because the GIs ecognized them as key items. The file with the shot ecods (File 12, Fig. 7) was impoted by the GIs fo futhe pocessing, such as poduction of maps and tables, and spatial aggegations to obtain mean esults fo geogaphic units on small-map scales. These types of esults ae extensively discussed in Chapte 5 fo the vaious land use types. The file with the shot ecods, with suitability esults fo the LEUs, was also used to compute 'competitive' land fo some cops by applying the module NEST. The pinciples and the task of the module NEST ae discussed in Chapte 4. Analysis of ALES esults was also caied out with a module called ALES-ANLY (Fig. 7). The module ALES-ANLY used the file with the long ecods containing data on suitability classes and type of limitations as input (File 11, Fig. 7). The main task is to poduce an oveview of the type of limitations which occu in a suitability class. Relative aeas of land with a paticula limitation o combination of limitations ae calculated fo each suitability class. The oveview can be poduced fo geogaphic units at diffeent levels, viz. NUTS-1 egions, ago-climatic egions, EC membe states, o the whole of the EC. Outcome of ALES-ANLY fo a paticula egion and land use type is given in Table 6.

35 In the example, 24.8 % of the egion was evaluated as well suitable, 1.2%. of the egion was modeately suitable because of management limitations, and 11.0% of the egion was unsuitable owing to sevee limitations of both soil aeation and management. The module ALES-ANLY also allows us to specify which dominant soil units occu in class 1. Oveviews of elative aeas with diffeent type of limitations ae extensively discussed in Chapte 5. Table 6 Example of the outcome of the module ALES-ANLY Suitability Type of Aea Relative class limitation') (km2) aea I) n..: not elevant, ma: management, sw: soil wate deficit, ae: soil aeation, and fe: natual soil fetility 2, 1: well suitable (no limitations), 2: modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and 3: unsuitable (sevee limitations)

36 4 DETERMINATION OF COMPETITIVE LAND The Dutch Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy (WRR) equied suitability esults fo vaious cop types at the level of the NUTS-1 egions. These data ae used as input fo the GOAL-model (Geneal Optimal allocation of Land Use). When applying the GOAL model, the geogaphical location of land within the NUTS-1 egion is not needed. Howeve, the model equies infomation as to whethe land suitable fo a paticula activity patly o completely coincides with the suitable aea of anothe activity (Fig. 8). The coinciding aea of suitable land fo both activities is called 'competitive'. In this chapte the tem 'activity' sometimes eplaces the expession of 'cop' o 'land use type'. When the GOAL-model allocates competitive land to one of the activities, it cannot be allocated to the othe activity as well. Then, it is obvious that the suitable aea fo the othe activity needs to be educed. If we need to detemine competitive land fo diffeent activities, it is elevant to know whethe the land suitable fo a paticula activity is completely included in the aea of suitable land fo anothe activity o not. When suitable land is completely included, we have classified this land as 'nested' suitable land. Fo instance, in Figue 8A the suitable land of activity 'A' is nested in the suitable aea of activity 'By. In the quantitative land evaluation pocedue, the 'nesting' appoach was followed fo the selection of suitable land fo annual cops and gass (Reinds and van Lanen, in pep.). The module EC MIXED was applied to select unsuitable land. If one of the land chaacteistics of a cetain land evaluation unit does not meet the selection citeia, the unit was called unsuitable iespective of the othe chaacteistics. The basic.set of selection citeia fo the above-mentioned type of cops (intensively managed gass, ceeals and oot cops) was identical. Besides the basic set, some additional citeia wee fomulated fo ceeals as compaed to gass. Fo instance, tempoaily pooly dained soils wee assumed to be unsuitable fo mechanized ceeal faming, wheeas they wee still suitable fo gass. Fo gass, no selection citeia wee defined which did not apply to ceeals. Hence, the suitable aea fo ceeals in a egion is usually smalle than the suitable aea fo gass, and is completely nested (Fig. 8A). The set of selection citeia fo ceeals was futhe extended fo oot cops. Fo instance, soils with a clay content of between 35% and 60% wee assumed to be unsuitable fo oot cops, wheeas they wee still suitable fo ceeals and gass. Again, fo gass and ceeals no selection citeia wee defined which did not apply to oot cops. This implies that the suitable land fo oot cops is less extensive than fo ceeals and gass, and futhe it is nested within the suitable land of both cop types. The GOAL model can easily deal with this type of nesting. Fo the goups of foest tee species and fuit tees consideed in this epot, ALES instead of EC MIXED was applied to evaluate land as unsuitable. Simila to EC MIXED, ALES offes the oppotunity to sceen the suitability of land fo single land chaacteistics as if they act independently.

37 1 A. Nested suitable aeas B. Non-nested suitable aeas I Fig. 8 Possible configuations of suitable lnd in a NUTS-I egion fo two diffeent cops The basic set of selection citeia could be extended to cops with highe demands. Howeve, fo foest tee species and fuit tees no basic set of selection citeia wee defined. Fo paticula fuit tee species, diffeent selection citeia wee applied to evaluate land as unsuitable than wee applied fo cetain goups of foest tee species. Fo instance, fo cetain goups of foest tees a low natual soil fetility esulted in sevee limitation, wheeas natual fetility was not consideed fo some fuit tees. Convesely, the pesence of some soil phases may impose a sevee estiction fo some fuit tees, wheeas they wee not assumed to hampe timbe gowth. Thii implies that the cop types consideed in this epot wee not completely nested accoding to a sequence fom low to high demanding cops. Futhemoe, if we compae the selection citeia fo foest and fuit tees with those of intensively managed gass, ceeals, and oot cops, then no complete nesting occus eithe. Moeove, ALES allows us to evaluate land as unsuitable based on cetain combinations of land chaacteistics. Fo example, a land evaluation can be assessed to be unsuitable if the clay content is highe than A%, but only if soil dainage class is 'B' and slope is 'X' o 'Y'. We also used these citeia to evaluate suitability of land fo foest tees and fuit tees. The use of land chaacteistics as done by ALES may esult in incomplete nested aeas of suitable land fo diffeent activities (Fig. 8B). This indicates that both activities have suitable land which do not coincide. When applying the GOAL model, howeve, it must be known which pat of the suitable aeas coincides. At the stat of the study this was not foeseen. Selection citeia wee independently defined fo each cop. Afte aggegating the esults of the individual land evaluation units to a weighted mean fo an administative egion (NUTS-1 level), it is impossible to discove whethe the aea of land is competitive. Fo example, when in egion A 50% of

38 suitable land occus fo activity 1 and only 25% fo activity 2, the elative aea of competitive land is usually less than 25%. Theoetically, detemination of coinciding suitable o unsuitable land could have been done at the level of the land evaluation unit. Howeve, this would have had to have been incopoated in the expet models built with ALES. This analysis was beyond the scope of this study. Thefoe, a moe pagmatic appoximation was followed to estimate the pecentage of coinciding suitable land fo two activities. The pecentage of suitable land fo an activity was compaed with the pecentage of anothe activity at the level of the land evaluation unit, instead of compaison at the NUTS-1 level. The phenomenon of non-nested land occus less fequently at the level of the evaluation unit. The pecentage of suitable land of a land evaluation unit does not usually equal 0% o 100% because the land evaluation units ae usually compound (Table 5). In a sepaate analysis, each of the goups of foest tees and fuit tees wee compaed with each of the thee types of cops (gass, ceeals, oot cops) consideed by Reinds and Van Lanen (1991). Fist, the smallest pecentage of suitable land of one of the two cops to be compaed was calculated fo each evaluation unit. This pecentage was assumed to be the pecentage of coinciding suitable o competitive land fo both cops. Second, the pecentage of emaining suitable land fo one of the two cops was detemined. Then, the pecentage of coinciding unsuitable land fo both cops was detemined fo each of the units. Finally, the data of the land evaluation units wee aggegated to weighted means fo the NUTS-1 egion. Examples of the tempoay file with esults fo some land evaluation units, and fo NUTS-1 egions ae given in Tables 7 and 8. Table 7 Results of the nesting pocedue fo some selected land evaluation units LEU code Aea Relative aea (%) of unit (km2) compe- suitable suitable cointitive fo fo ciding land cop 1 cop 2 unsuitable only only land The pincipal assumption in this appoach is that the best soils can be used fo each cop. So, the best soils ae always included in the pecentage of suitable o competitive land fo evey cop. Moeove, it was assumed that if the aea of suitable

39 land fo one activity is geate than fo anothe, the cop and management system of the suitable land puts lowe demands on it. Table 8 Results of the nesting pocedue fo some selected NUTS-1 egions NUTS-1 egion Relative aea (%) of unit compe- suitable suitable cointitive fo fo ciding land cop 1 cop 2 unsuitable only only Schleswig-Holstein Ile de Fance Nod-Ovest Nood-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Ieland Denmak Ellas (Noth) The pocedue fo each land evaluation unit can be summaized as followed: s,(i) = sl(i) if sl(i) < s2(i) s(i) = s2(i) - sl(i) u,(i) = s2(i) s,(i) s(i) u,(i) = s2(i) = sl(i) - s2(i) = sl(i) coinciding aea of suitable o competitive land (%) of a land evaluation unit i fo both cops; aea of suitable land (%) of a land evaluation unit i fo cop 1 and 2; emaining aea of suitable land (%) of a land evaluation unit i fo one of the cops; coinciding aea of unsuitable land (%) of a land evaluation unit i fo both cops. Pocedue poceeds with the aggegation fo the NUTS-1 egion:

40 whee: Sc : coinciding aea of suitable o competitive land (%) in an administative egion (NUTS- 1 level); &I : aea of suitable land fo cop 1 (%) in an administative egion (NUTS-1 level); S2 : aea of suitable land (%) fo cop 2 in an administative egion (NUTS-1 level); 4 : coinciding aea of unsuitable land (%) in an administative egion (NUTS-1 level); o(i) : aceage of land evaluation unit i (in km2); 0 : aceage of paticula administative egion (NUTS-1 level),(in km2). So, if a land evaluation unit is not completely suitable o unsuitable, this pocedue assumes a nesting of suitable land at the level of a land evaluation unit (Fig. 8A). This assumption does not apply completely to evey cop as mentioned above. These cases ae indicated in Chapte 5. The nesting opeations wee caied out using the module NEST (Fig. 7). A section of the outcome of the module NEST is given in Table 8 (File 13, Fig. 7). The file with the esults at the land evaluation unit level (Table 7) is of a tempoay natue.

41 5 SUITABILITY FOR FORESTRY AND VARIOUS FRUIT CROPS 5.1 Foesty No discussion is equied about whethe o whee a foest can flouish within the Euopean Communities. Fo the geatest pat of the EC this is always possible. Oiginally, most EC land was coved by foest. Unfotunately, due to human intevention, vast aeas have disappeaed. The pimeval foests wee vey diffeent fom the foests we know today (Buis, 1985, Hesme and Schoede, 1963), especially with egad to species and stuctue. It is also likely that the poduction of the ecosystems was substantially diffeent. Theefoe, the question of whee poductive foests could thive within the EC, is totally diffeent fom the question of whethe they could thive. And, with egad to the lage amount of impoted wood and wood poducts fom othe pats of the wold to the EC, this question needs special attention. Inceasing timbe poduction within the EC is not only a socio-economic matte fo the EC itself, but could also contibute to solutions fo global poblems such as the vanishing topical ain foests. Befoe answeing the question of whee poductive foests could thive within the EC, much needs to be known about the equiements of tee species to be gown on such sites and about the land qualities. Recent developments in Geogaphical Infomation Systems (GIs) and in Automated Land evaluation Systems (ALES), make it possible to give a moe detailed analysis than was possible a few yeas ago. In this study, the landevaluation fo foesty was caied out fo the Land Utilization Type (LUT) 'Fully Mechanized Poduction Foesty'. Within the EC, ae geat diffeences in climate and soil types, between the nothen and southen egions. This geatly effects the possible dispesion of tee species. Because tee species have diffeent ecological equiements and diffeent yield potentials, the evaluation fo foesty is pesented fo thee boad goups of tee species: - Fast gowing tee species - Nomal gowing moe demanding tee species - Nomal gowing less demanding tee species. Fo seveal easons no detailled poduction levels ae given fo the thee distinguished goups of tee species. Fist, thee is consideable lack of compaable poduction data. Second, if infomation on the poduction level is available, little is known about the site whee poducion was established. A thid eason is the possible diffeence in poduction potential of tee species in one of the thee goups. Howeve, the ecological ange of species within one goup ae much the same, thei highest yields may diffe consiably. Futhe, the poduction potential of cops inceases in an absolute sense fom, oughly, the nothen EC egions to the Mediteanean egions (Koning et al., in pep.). Consideing this as a whole, we decided to indicate only the goss poduction level. As mentioned, the ecological equiements and yield potential of tee species within a goup may, howeve, also vay. Theefoe, the

42 esults must be consideed as a fist indication. Fo example, a pediction that thee will be no limitations fo a paticula goup may only efe to one o a few species fom of that goup. Fast gowing tee species High poductive species, such as Popla (Populus spec.), Willow (Salix spec.) and Eucalypts (Eucalyptus spec.), belong to the goup of fast gowing tee species. When moistue supply, nutients supply, tempeatue and adiation ae adequate, the annual incement may each a yield of 30 m3 ha-' (Rosa and Moeia, 1987). On many, somewhat favouable sites, howeve, a yield of 20 m3 ha-' yea'' seems a easonable value. To each such a high yield, these species need a pemanent soil wate supply (Fabiao et al., 1985, Penfold and Willis, 1961, Maye, 1984). In geneal, Poplas demand moe nutients than Eucalypts. In the evaluation, the nutient equiements of Popla wee chosen as efeence. Compaed with the othe goups of tee species, the fast gowing species equie a much highe soil wate and nutients supply. Futhemoe, Popla can esist a high goundwate level o even inundation fo a longe peiod. The distibution aea of Popla is fa moe noth than that of Eucalypts because of esistance to fost. Theefoe, Eucalypts do not gow in the notheasten pat of the EC which has cold continental wintes. Nomal gowing moe demanding tee species The tee species belonging to the goup of nomal gowing moe demanding species have a nomal yield compaed with the fast gowing species (viz. less than fo fast gowing species). The equiements fo soil wate and nutients ae still elatively high compaed with the goup of nomal gowing less demanding tee species. Tee species fom this goup ae, fo example, Euopean silve fi (Abies alba), Westen and Easten hemlock (Tsuga hetophylla, T. canadensis) and Beech (Fagus sylvatica). On the best sites, the yield of the conifeous species may be moe than 20 m3 ha-' Fo the deciduous species, 10 m3 ha-' may be consideed as a good yield. This yield can be obtained if the soil moistue supply is adequate duing the whole gowing season. Futhe, a well-dained and well-aeated soil is needed (Maye, 1984, Schutt et al., 1984). Compaed with the fast gowes, these species may need less soil moistue. Howeve, compaed with the goup of less demanding tee species, they still equie a highe nutient and moistue supply fom the soil. As aleady mentioned, this goup consists of deciduous and conifeous tees. They both occu on dy sites. On 'wet' sites, it ae mainly deciduous tees that ae of any impotance to timbe poduction. Fo easons of claity, this goup will be indicated as a 'moe demanding tee species' in the following. Nomal gowing less demanding tee species Tee species belonging to the goup of nomal gowing less demanding tee species poduce a elatively high yield on elatively poo sites. A 'poo' site may efe to nutients supply o to soil wate supply o to both. Tee species fom this goup ae mainly Pine species such as Scots pine (Pinus sylvestis), Maitime pine (P. pinaste) and Black pine (P.niga). On the vey poo sites, timbe gowth still continues, but is moe concened with suvival than to timbe poduction. If conditions ae moe favouable, howeve, the yield of some species may each 10 m3 ha-' Fo Scots pine, 7 m3 ha-' may be consideed as being a good gowth. Compaed

43 with both othe goups, this goup has the lowest site equiements but cannot attain an equally high level of poduction. Tee species fom this goup may occu on both wet and dy sites. Nomal gowing less demanding tees can also gow on the bette sites. They do not usually occu thee, howeve, because othe, moe poductive species ae planted on such sites. Fo easons of claity, this goup is indicated as a 'less demanding tee species' in the following Evaluation citeia As a bounday condition in this study, foesty was consideed to be using modem exploitation techniques. Sustainability of land use is anothe objective. No possible impovements of the site (e.g. fetilization, iigation) wee included in the evaluation. Theefoe, land evaluation units wee evaluated in thei natual state. When foesty fo timbe poduction is consideed, it means that sites may be evaluated as unsuitable fo foesty, while they may be suitable fo othe kinds of foest poducts o sevices. These foests may be valuable fo puposes othe than timbe poduction, fo example land consevation (e.g. pevention of eosion), natue consevation o eceation. Moeove, foest poducts othe than timbe, such as cok, esin o leaves may be havested. Sites suitable fo these poducts ae not necessaily suitable fo timbe poduction. Land suitability fo foesty was deived fom the following land use equiements which hold fo all thee goups of tee species: - soil wate deficit - soil aeation - fetility (natual) - chemical conditions - tempeatue egime - management conditions If all equiements ae optimally met by the land (Land Qualities), the evaluation esults in 'no limitation,. If one o moe equiements ae suboptimally met by the land, the evaluation will esult in a 'modeate limitation'. In such cases the poduction level will usually be less than in those of 'no limitations'. Although the same type of equiements wee defined fo all thee goups of tee species, the level of the equiements necessay fo a good, modeate o low yield, vaies among the thee goups. This means, fo instance, that a soil wate deficit of x mm fo fast gowing tee species esults in 'sevee limitations' while fo the goup of nomal gowing tee species the esult may be 'no limitations'. In geneal, foest tees place moe and highe demands on the soil when thei possible maximum yield is highe. When land meets seveal equiements only suboptimally, o meets one equiement pooly, it is pooly suitable, and tee gowth will usually be seiously educed compaed with optimal conditions. In this study, pooly suitable means that the poduction is (vey) low o havesting may be (vey) difficult because of sevee management poblems. In many cases, howeve, sites with sevee limitations ae cuently coveed by foest

44 because a low poduction level is consideed to be bette than no poduction at all. Also, aguments othe than timbe poduction, fo example natue consevation, soil potection etc., may be the eason why land is being coveed by foest. Sometimes special havesting techniques, such as winch-havesting o winte logging, ae used. These special techniques allow havesting, but also incease the costs. Theefoe, they wee not consideed in ou study. Soil wate deficit To evaluate soil wate deficit of land the dainage status, mean annual pecipitation deficit, maximum ooting depth, textue of the topsoil and soil phases wee taken into account. The lage ALES decision tee used to evaluate the soil wate deficit cannot be completely pesented in this epot. Theefoe, some geneal decision ules that wee applied ae given. The climatic and soil chaacteistics ae divided into classes (Reinds et al., in pep.). The fist entance of the decision tee is the soil chaacteistic of the dainage status. If a land evaluation unit is vey pooly, pooly o tempoaily pooly dained it was assumed to have no soil wate deficit. On the othe hand, if the unit is excessively dained the soil wate deficit depends on othe land chaacteistics. Second, the pecipitation deficit was consideed. The soil wate deficit was assumed to be zeo o low if the pecipitation deficit is also low. The soil wate deficit may be high in aeas with a high pecipitation deficit and a soil wate supply. The thid chaacteistic used is the maximum ooting depth. If oots can gow deepe, the soil wate deficit will become less. The fouth chaacteistic applied is the textue of the topsoil. In cetain ago-climatic zones, soils with a medium to fine textue have a smalle soil wate deficit than soils with a coase o vey fine textue. Peat soils wee usually evaluated as medium-textued soils. The fifth and last chaacteistic used is the pesence of soil phases, such as gavel (>35%), stones (>35%) o petocalcic, saline, and sodic hoizons. The pesence of a soil phase usually esulted in a (vey) sevee soil wate deficit. As mentioned, the thee distinguished goups of tee species place diffeent equiements on the site, fo instance with egad to the soil wate deficit. Theefoe, diffeent decision tees wee developed to evaluate soil wate deficit fo the thee goups of tee species. The most impotant assumptions ae pesented in Tables 9 to 11. In the last column of these tables, the seveity level of a possible limitation of the soil wate deficit is given. Fom seveity level 1 to 5 the soil wate deficit inceasingly limits tee gowth. In Tables 9 to 1 1, the seveity level is geneally given as a ange. The lowe limit of the ange applies to elatively bette site conditions than the uppe limit. Although these site chaacteistics wee consideed in the evaluation, fo instance soil textue, they wee not included in the tables fo easons of claity.

45 Table 9 Decision citeia fo evaluating soil wate deficit fo fast gowinn tee species Dainage Pecipitation Rooting Soil wate deficit status deficit (mm) depth (cm) limitation class ') vey poo, poo, tempoaily poo n.,2) impefect 40 >so ~300 >50 modeately good <25 good >50 excessive > >300 1) 1 = no, 2 = slight, 3 = modeate, 4 = sevee, 5 = vey sevee limitation. 2) n..= not elevant. Table 10 Decision citeia fo evaluating soil wate deficit fo nomal nowinn moe demanding tee species Dainage Pecipitation Rooting Soil wate deficit status deficit (mm) depth (cm) limitation class ') vey poo, poo, tempoaily poo n.. 2) impefect 40 > >400 >so modeately good, <25 n.. 1 good, excessive >SO > >SO 1-2 >400 n.. 5 1) 1 = no, 2 = slight, 3 = modeate, 4 = sevee, 5 = vey sevee limitation. 2) n..= not elevant.

46 Table 11 Decision citeia fo evaluating soil wate deficit fo nomal nowinn less demanding tee soecies Dainage Pecipitation Rooting Soil wate deficit status deficit (mm) depth (cm) limitation class '1 vey poo, poo, tempoaily poo impefect modeately good, good, excessive, 1) 1 = no, 2 = slight, 3 = modeate, 4 = sevee, 5 = vey sevee limitation. 2) n..= not elevant. Soil aeation The soil aeation was assumed to be dependent on the dainage status and textue of the topsoil. In Table 12 the ALES decision tee fo soil aeation is pesented schematically. Table 12 Decision citeia fo evaluating soil aeation fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species Dainage Textue of fast moe less status topsoil gowing demanding demanding1) vey poo coase, medium, fine, medium fine, vey fine peat poo coase medium, medium fine, fine, vey fine tempoaily coase poo medium, medium fine, fine vey fine impefect coase medium, medium fine, fine vey fine modeately coase good medium, medium fine, fine vey fine good, excessive n.. 2) ) 1 = no, 2 = slight, 3 = modeate, 4 = sevee, 5 = vey sevee limitation. 2) n..= not elevant.

47 Fetility Assessment of the natual fetility of land was based on evaluation of the cation exchange capacity (CEC), and the base satuation (BS). The ALES decision tee developed is schematically shown in Table 13. Table I3 Decision citeia fo evaluating fetility of land fo fastgowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species fast moe less CEC ') BS') gowing demanding demanding vey low, low 33) 3 2 low medium high medium low medium high high, low vey high medium high peat low medium high ) CEC = Cation Exchange Capacity 2) BS = Base satuation 3) 1 = no, 2 = modeate, 3 = sevee limitations. Chemical conditions In the assessment of fetility, those soil chaacteistics wee included which detemine nutient availability and nutient etention. Thee ae some othe soil chaacteistics which detimentally affect tee gowing possibilities. These chaacteistics wee evaluated though the chemical conditions. Fo instance, alkalinity and salinity will negatively affect yield. Theefoe, thei pesence o absence was taken into account. Table 14 shows the ALES decision tee schematically. Table 14 Decision citeia fo evaluating chemical conditions fofastgowing, nomalgowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species Exchangeable Sodium Salinity imitation') >15 % >4 mmholcm pesent n..2) 2 absent pesent 2 absent 1 1) 1 = no, 2 = sevee limitations. 2) n.. = not elevant. Tempeatue egime Low tempeatues may cause gowth stess o even pohibit the gowth of tees. The tempeatue egime duing the gowing season, and especially duing July is of geat impotance. If the mean tempeatue in July is below 9 degees Celsius, foest gowth

48 was consideed to be impossible. Foest gowth is also impossible if the' mean tempeatue duing the gowing season does not ise above 10 degees Celsius (Tanquillini, 1979). Close to these tempeatue limits, tee gowth was assumed to be suboptimal. In Table 15 the developed ALES decision tee is schematically given. Table 15 Decision citeia fo evaluating tempeatue effect on foest gowth Mean tempeatue Mean maximum tempeatue imitation') duing July duing gowing season (degees Celsius) (degees Celsius) <9 n.. 2) <lo 3 >lo n.. 2 >11 <lo n.. 2 >12 n.. 1 1) 1 = no, 2 = modeate, 3 = sevee limitation. 2) n.. = not elevant. Management conditions Besides qualities of soil and climate, which affect tee gowing, othe qualities ae impotant which may influence management opeations in the foests. Mechanized havesting and planting techniques wee assumed to impose cetain uppe limits on acceptable slope angle and dainage status. Table 16 shows the implemented ALES decision tee schematically. Table 16 Decision citeia fo evaluating management conditions of foest land fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species Dainage status Textue Slope (9%) vey poo coase, medium, medium fine, fine, vey fine n.. 2) 3 peat <8 2 >8 3 poo, tempoaily poo n.. el5 2 >15 3 impefect, <I5 1 modeately good, good, n excessive >25 3 1) 1 = no, 2 = modeate, 3 = seve limitations. 2) n..= not elevant. imitation') Suitability fo foesty In this section, the evaluation esults fo the situation of the EC ae explained fo each of the thee distinguished goups of tee species. The evaluation pocess is

49 schematically shown in Figue 3. The physical suitability fo foesay was detemined by evaluating fo each land evaluation unit the land qualities as detemined by the above-mentioned decision tees (Tables 9 to 16). Theefoe, fo each goup of tee species, a physical suitability decision tee was made. In this decision tee, the combined effect of the cuent land qualities was tanslated into fou suitability classes. Detemining the oveall suitability in this way esulted in land being allocated to one of the fou suitability classes. Class 1 compises well suitable land with no limitations, and class 2 contains still suitable land but with modeate limitations. Land in classes 1 and 2 is indicated as suitable land. Unsuitable land was allocated to eithe class 3 o 4. Class 3 land has (vey) sevee limitations with espect to tee gowing conditions and possibly management, wheeas class 4 land has (vey) sevee limitations associated with management options only. The esults of the evaluation of the physical suitability ae given in Tables 17 to 20. The esults wee aggegated at NUTS-1 level and pesented as tables in Appendix 4. On Maps 1, 2 and 3 the pecentage of land with no o'modeate limitations (suitable land) fo each NUTS-1 egion is given fo the goups of fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species, espectively. On maps 4,5 and 6 the esults ae pesented pe land evaluation unit. The esults of the evaluation of the physical suitability fo the entie EC ae given in Table 17. The suitability is given in aceages (km2) as well as in pecentages of the total EC aea. The figues in this table ae ounded off. The figues ae discussed pe goup of tee species in following sections. Some attention is also given to soil types with egad to thei suitability fo one of the thee goups of tee species. Although only the names of the soil types ae given, the textue is also of geat impotance. Fo easons of claity, howeve, this is not given. Table I7 Total aeas (kd) and pecentages (%) of suitability classes fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and, nomal gowing less demanding tee species fo the Euopean Communities Goup of tee species Suitability class fast gowing (km2) (%) nomal gowing (km2) moe demanding (96) nomal gowing (km2) less demanding (96) ) 1 = no, 2 = modeate, 3 = sevee limitations, 4 = sevee management limitations only.

50 Fast gowing tee species Suitability at EC level About 18% of the EC has no limitations fo fast gowing tee species, wheeas 9% has modeate limitations (Table 17). Half the aea with modeate limitations (5% of EC) has an insufficient soil moistue supply capacity. Othe modeate limitations ae caused by management (2%), aeation (3%), o by a combination of these conditions. Sevee limitations pevail on 72% of the EC aea. The dominant easons being a sevee soil wate deficit (38%) and a poo fetility level (30%). No moe than 1% of the total aea is unsuitable fo timbe poduction because of solely sevee management estictions. It is likely that a geate pecentage than 1% is unsuitable because of management estictions. But this could not be deived fom the esults because sevee limitations associated with a soil wate deficit o fetility oveules the management limitation. In such cases, the land evaluation unit is allocated to class 3 and not to class 4. Because both classes contain unsuitable land, the pedicted poduction potential is not affected by this. In the following pat of this section, the fast gowing tee species ae efeed to as FG species. Map 4, with the esults of the individual land evaluation units, gives a bette insight into the distibution of the suitable aeas. Simila to the othe maps, this map also pesents elative aeas of land with no o modeate limitations. Relative aeas of land, even at the level of a land evaluation unit, had to be given because most of the units ae compound (Reinds and Van Lanen, in pep.). The compound natue could imply that pat of the unit is unsuitable wheeas the othe pat is suitable. The map clealy shows that the best suitable soils have goundwate influence. In the south of the EC these soils ae mainly located in ive valleys and deltas, wheeas in the noth othe soils with a goundwate influence o with wate stagnation also occu which ae well suitable. The lagest aeas of suitable land ae found in the nothwest of the EC and in nothen Italy. Suitability at county and NUTS-1 level The suitability fo FG species is pesented in Table 18 fo each membe county of the EC. The suitability pe NUTS-1 egion is given in Appendix 4. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions fo FG species, i.e. those with the highest pecentage of land with no o modeate limitations, was found in the southeasten egions of the UK (Map 1). Fo example, in the egions South East and East Anglia moe than 80% of the aea is evaluated as suitable. Othe favouable egions (60-80% of the aea with no o modeate limitations) ae the East and West Midlands, both located in the United Kingdom, West Nethelands and Nod-pas-de-Calais in Fance. Most othe egions, except fo the Mediteanean egions, Scotland and Wales, have no o modeate limitations ove 40-60% of the egion. The southen egions of Spain, Potugal, and Geece, and southen Italy and the Mediteanean egions of Fance ae suitable fo no moe than 20% of thei aea. This is mainly because of the high potential tanspiation in these egions combined with an insufficient soil wate supply capacity. The pooly suitable egions in the UK have sevee fetility estictions and ae theefoe suitable fo no moe than 20% of the egion.

51 Table 18 Total aeas (km2) and pecentages (%) of suitability classes fo fast nowinn tee species fo the membe counties of the Euopean Communities Suitability class') County West-Gemany Fance Italy Nethelands Belgium Luxemboug United Kingdom Ieland Denmak Geece Spain Potugal - 1) 1 = no limitations, 2 = modeate limitations, 3 = sevee limitations, 4 = sevee management limitations At county level, Fance has the lagest aea of land within the EC with no o modeate limitations fo FG species. About 21 million hectaes ae suitable which is about 38% of the land. Gemany has the second lagest suitable aea, about 11 million hectaes o 44% of the county's aea. The smallest aea of suitable land is found in Luxemboug: hectaes o 25% of the land. This is of couse, due to the small size of the county. If we conside the pecentage of suitable land, Denmak has the highest pecentage of suitable land, i.e. 53%, followed by Ieland and the Nethelands, whee about 50% of the land is suitable. The smallest pecentages of

52 suitable land ae found in Potugal (4%), Spain (7%) and Geece (8%). This is mainly due to the vey high pecipitation deficits in lage pats of these counties (e.g. Reinds et al., in pep.). In the next pat of this section, the most and least suitable soils fo FG species ae pesented fo each membe county. Futhemoe, the main limitations ae given as well as the pecentages of suitable and unsuitable land. In West-Gemany the most suitable soils fo FG species ae mainly Eutic Gleyic and Fluvi Calcaic Fluvisols and, Othic Luvisols. About 44% of Gemany has no o modeate limitations fo FG species (Table 18). The main limitation is a poo fetility level on about 42% of the land. This mainly occus on Distic Cambisols and Humic o Othic Podzols which have a vey low CEC and a low base satuation. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae Schleswig-Holstein (55%), Bemen (70%) and Baden-Wuttembeg (56% of NUTS-1 aea). In these egions, lage aeas with Othic Luvisols occu. The least suitable egion is Rheinland-Pfalz whee 31% is suitable. In this egion, Dystic Cambisols with a poo fetility state ae dominant. In Fance the most suitable soils ae pincipally Fluvisols. Cambisols may also be well suitable if the soil wate supply capacity and fetility level ae sufficient. About 48% of Fance has no o modeate limitations fo FG species (Table 18). The main causes of gowth stess ae sevee soil wate deficit and a poo fetility level, which account fo 26% and 35% espectively. The soil wate deficit vaies not only pe soil type but also pe ago-climatic zone. Because of die climatic conditions, the soil wate deficit becomes geate in the southen egions. The soil wate deficit may oveshadow othe limiting factos, such as management conditions due to slopes. Sevee soil wate limitations mainly occu on Eutic Cambisols and Othic Rendzinas. Sevee fetility limitations mainly occu on Othic and Leptic Podzols, Podzoluvisols, Rankes and Dystic Lithosols. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae found in the noth: Bassin Paisien (49%), Est (49%) and Nod-pas-de-Calais (77% of NUTS-1 aea) whee Fluvisols, Gleyic, Calcaic and Vetic Cambisols and Othic Luvisols ae fequent. The least suitable egion is the southen Mediteanean with 14% suitable land. In this egion, the potential tanspiation is too high compaed with the soil wate supply capacity of most soils. m i s fo about 21% suitable fo FG species. The most suitable soils ae pincipally Fluvisols. On about 55% of Italian land a sevee soil wate deficit dominates on mainly Eutic Cambisols, Calcaic Regosols and, Calcaic Luvisols. Sevee fetility limitations occu on about 21% of the land on mainly Dystic Cambisols and Dystic Lithosols which both have a vey low CEC and a low base satuation. The most suitable egions at NUTS-1 level ae the nothen egions: Lombadia (48%), Nod- Est (48%) and Emilia-Romagna (54% of the NUTS-1 aea), whee potential tanspiation is elatively low and elatively lage aeas of Eutic Cambisols and Othic Rendzinas occu. In the Nethelands about 48% of the land has no o modeate limitations fo FG species. The main well suitable soils ae Fluvisols. A poo fetility level is the dominant limitation on about 50% of the land. This mainly occus on Podzols and

53 Dystic Histosols. West Nethelands is the most suitable NUTS-1 egion. Thee, 75% of the land has no o modeate limitations. The dominant soil types ae Fluvisols and Eumc Histosols. The least suitable egion is South Nethelands with 34% suitable land and whee Podzols ae dominant. In Belgium 39% of the land is suitable. Also in Belgium, Fluvisols and Othic Luvisols ae the best suitable soil types. The main sevee limitation is a poo fetility level which occus on about 56% of the land, which mainly compises Podzols, Podzoluvisols and Dystic Canbisols. The most suitable NUTS-1 egion is Bussels with 72% of suitable land. The most suitable soils in this egion ae Fluvisols and Othic Luvisols. The Flemish egion is the least suitable (33% of NUTS-1 aea) because of lage aeas of Podzols and Dystic Podzoluvisols which have a low natual fetility state. About 25% of Luxemboug, has no o modeate limitations fo FG species. The most suitable soil types ae mainly Vetic Cambisols. The dominant sevee limitation is a poo fetility status which pincipally occus on Dystic Cambisols, fo about 34% of the land. Luxemboug is not futhe subdivided into NUTS-1 egions. In the United Kingdom about 39% of the land is suitable fo FG species. The most suitable soils ae mainly Fluvisols, Eutic and Gleyic Cambisols and Othic and Gleyic Luvisols. On about 50% of the land a poo fetility level seiously educes tee gowth. Map 1 shows a emakable decease in suitability fiom south to noth in the UK which is detemined by the pevailing soil types. Hence, the most suitable NUTS-1 egions can be found in East Anglia (80%), the East Midlands (76%) and the South East (83% of NUTS-1 aea). Hee, lage aeas occu with well suitable Fluvisols, Cambisols and Gleysols. The least suitable NUTS-1 egions ae Scotland (12%) and Wales (14%). The low figue fo Scotland is due to lage aeas of Dystic Histosols, Podzols, and Dystic Cambisols which have a poo fetility status. In Wales, Dystic Cambisols with a poo fetility state also occu fequently. About 48% of Ieland has no o modeate estictions fo the goup of FG species. The most suitable soils ae mainly Othic Luvisols and Stagno Dystic Gleysols. About 46% of the land has sevee fetility estictions which mainly occu on Dystic Cambisols, Dystic Lithosols and on Podzols. As mentioned above, Denmak, of all the membe counties of the EC, has the highest pecentage of suitable land fo FG species, i.e. 53%. Well suitable soils ae pincipally Eutic Cambisols and Othic Luvisols. About 47% of the land suffes fom sevee fetility estictions, mainly on Humic Gleysols and Podzols. About 8% of Geece is well suitable fo FG species. Nealy all the well suited soils ae Fluvi Calcaic Fluvisols in which the FG species ae pemanently fed by goundwate though capillay ise. Othe soils ae unsuited because of an insufficient soil wate supply capacity and vey high potential tanspiation. The Noth is the most suitable NUTS-1 egion. About 11% has no o modeate limitations. In this egion, the lagest aea of Fluvisols occu in which pemanent goundwate ensues an adequate soil wate supply. The least suitable egios, with only 2% suitable land ae

54 the East and Southen Islands. Hadly any Fluvisols o othe goundwate affected soils ae found hee. Hence, a sevee soil wate deficit is the most impotant limitation. In S~ain about 7% of the land has no o modeate limitations fo FG species. Because of the high potential tanspiation, only soils with a pemanent goundwate influence ae well suited. Hence, the best soils ae mainly Fluvisols. The most impotant estiction is a soil wate deficit which occus on a wide ange of soil types (68% of the land). On about 22% of Spanish land a poo fetility level educes tee gowth. This land mainly compises Humic and Dysmc Cambisols, Podzols, Dystic Lithosols, and Rankes. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae Noeste and Madid with 13% and 16% of land with, espectively, no o modeate limitations. The least suitable egions ae Nooeste and Su with 3% and 5% suitable land espectively. A sevee soil wate deficit is the dominant estiction. Potugal has the lowest pecentage of suitable land of all the EC membe counties: about 4% of Potuguese land. Suitable soils ae mainly Fluvisols and Luvisols. A poo fetility level and sevee soil wate deficit ae the main limitations on about 47% of Potuguese land. Gowth limitation caused by a soil wate deficit pevails on almost all soil types, wheeas a limitation caused by poo fetility mhly occus on Cambisols. In Potugal, the most suitable NUTS-1 egion is Sud do Continente whee about 7% of the land has no o modeate limitations fo FG species. Suitable soils ae Eutic Fluvisols and Gleyic Luvisols. In the Note do Continente egion, no moe than 2% of the land is suitable. A poo fetility level is the dominant limitation in about 70% of this egion. Nomal gowing moe demanding tee species Suitability at EC level In the following pat of this section the nomal gowing moe demanding tee species ae indicated as NGM species. About 28% of the EC has no o modeate limitations fo nomal gowing moe demanding tee species (Table 17). This pecentage is equivalent to about 64 million hectaes. The modeate limitations, which occu on 8% of EC land, mainly efe to a poo soil aeation (6% of EC land). On about 72% of the EC aea, sevee limitations pevail fo NGM species. About 36% of the EC has a sevee soil wate deficit, 25% has a poo fetility status, 9% has inadequate aeation, and about 1% has sevee management limitations only. Suitability at county and NUTS-1 level The suitability fo NGM species is given in Table 19 fo each membe county of the EC. The suitability pe NUTS-1 egion is pesented in Appendix 5.

55 Table 19 Total aeas (km2) and pecentages (%) of suitability classes fo nomal nowitk moe demandinn tee species fo the membe counties of the Euopean Communities County Suitability class1) West-Gemany Fance Italy Nethelands Belgium Luxemboug United Kingdom Ieland Denmak Geece Spain Potugal 1) 1 = no limitations, 2 = modeate limitations, 3 = sevee limitations, 4 = sevee management limitations only. The evaluation esults pe NUTS-1 egion fo NGM species ae pesented on Map 2. This map shows that the most suitable egions can be found in nothwest Fance. Moe than 60% of this land is suitable. All egions close to the Alps in nothen Italy, easten Fance and the southen pat of West Gemany, southwest Fance, southeast Bitain and Denmak have no o modeate limitations on 40-60% of the aea. In the moe southely egions than these, the aea of suitable land deceases, mainly because of high soil wate deficits. No moe than 20% of the land in these egions is suitable. The nothen pat of the United Kingdom is also suitable fo no moe than 20%. This is mainly due to inadequate soil aeation and poo fetility of the soils.

56 In an absolute sense, Fance has the lagest aea with no o modeate limitations fo NGM species, i.e. about 28 million hectaes, which is about 52% of the aea of the county. The smallest aea of well suitable land is found in Luxemboug: hectaes o 26%. If we only conside the pecentages, both Fance and Denmak have the highest pecentages of suitable land, i.e. both about 52%. The lowest pecentage of suitable land is in Potugal, and amounts to 4% of the land. In West-Gemanythe most suitable soils ae mainly Othic Luvisols which have many favouable chaacteistics. About 42% has no o modeate limitations fo NGM species. The main estiction is a poo fetility level which occus on about 50% of the land. The dominant soil types with fetility poblems ae Podzols and Dystic Cambisols. At NUTS-1 level, the egions with the highest pecentage of no o modeate limitations ae Bemen (61%). Nodhein-Westfalen (49%) and Baden- Wuttembeg (55% of NUTS-1 aea). The least suitable egions ae Niedesachsen and Rheinland-Pfalz, whee 30% is suitable. Fance: about 52% of Fench land has no o modeate limitations fo NGM species. The most suitable soils ae Othic Luvisols, Eutic Cambisols, and some of the Fluvisols. A sevee soil wate deficit (26%) and a poo fetility level (21% of the land) ae the main causes of gowth eduction. In the egions with a high potential tanspiation, soil wate deficits occu on almost evey soil type without goundwate influence. A poo fetility level mainly occus on Podzols and Dystic Cambisols. Most of the Fench NUTS-1 egions have vast aeas of suitable land fo NGM species. In Nod-pasde-Calais 83% of the aea is suitable. Convesely, the Mediteanean is unsuitable fo about 85%; 60% because of a soil wate deficit and 24% because of a poo fetility level. Hence, it was found to be the least suitable NUTS-1 egion of Fance. In 23% of the land has no o modeate limitations fo NGM species. The most suitable soils mainly compise Eutic and Vetic Calcaic Cambisols and Othic Luvisols. Calcaic Regosols ae also suitable. The main gowth limiting facto (48% of Italian land) is a sevee soil wate deficit which occus on many soil types. The second impotant limiting facto is a poo fetility level on 21% of the land which occus on mainly Dystic Cambisols and Podzds. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae found in the noth of Italy. In Nod-Est and Lombadia, about 55% of the egion has no o modeate limitations. The southen egions ae the least suitable. Sicilia is evaluated as completely unsuitable fo NGM species, wheeas in the egions Sadegna and Sud suitable land coves no moe than 1% and 4% espectively. In the Nethelands 40% of the land has no o modeate limitations. Fo the most pat, Calcaic Fluvi Cambisols and Othic Luvisols contibute to the aea of suitable land. The pedominant estiction is a poo fetility level (41% of Dutch land) occuing mainly on Podzols. The highest pecentage of suitable land is found in the NUTS-1 egion West-Nethelands (59%), whee lage aeas of Fluvisols occu. Although the Fluvisols ae evaluated as suitable, half of them have modeate limitations with egad to soil aeation. Bette suitable soils, such as Fluvi Calcic Cambisols, cove only small aeas in this egion. The least suitable NUTS-1 egions ae Noth and South Nethelands whee about 33% of the land is suitable.

57 In Belgium about 37% is suitable fo NGM species. The most suitable soils ae'othic Luvisols. The main gowth limitation (56% of Belgian land) is caused by poo fetility which pedominantly occus on Podzols and Dystic Podzoluvisols. The NUTS-1 egion Bussel is the most suitable egion of Belgium. In this small egion, 83% of the land is suitable. The dominant soil type is an Othic Luvisol which has no limitations. In the least suitable egion, viz. the Flemish egion, 33% of the land is suitable. Thee, lage aeas of Podzols occu, the fetility status of which is too low fo NGM species. In Luxemboug 26% of the land is suitable, the soils of which ae mainly Vetic Canbisols. Because of a vast aea of Dystic Cambisols, about 34% of the land has sevee fetility limitations. Sevee aeation limitations occu on about 25% of the 1and.This aea mainly consists of Stagno Gleyic Luvisols. Luxemboug is not futhe subdivided into NUTS-1 egions. About 22% of the United Kin~dom has no o modeate limitations fo NGM species. This is the lowest pecentage of suitable land of the nothen membe counties and equals about the pecentage fo Italy. The most suitable soils ae some Fluvisols, Eutic, Gleyic o Calcaic Cambiiols (o combination of these), and Othic o Calcaic Luvisols. The pedominant limiting facto is a poo fetility status. Sevee aeation estictions mainly occu on soil types with wate stagnation and with a fine textue, such as (Stagno) Gleysols, (Stagno) Luvisols and on Histosols. On the latte soils, the dainage is vey poo. Fetility poblems mainly occu on Dystic Cambisols. Regosols and Podzols also often have fetility limitations. Geat diffeences in the aea of suitable land occu among the UK NUTS-1 egions. In East Anglia 45% of the land has no limitations fo NGM species, wheeas in Nothen Ieland and in the Noth no moe than 3% of the land has no limitations. Convesely, in the southeasten egions elatively high pecentages of suitable land occu. In the pooly suitable egions, lage aeas of Histosols, Stagno Gleysols and Placic Podzols occu, which ae unsuitable because of inadequate aeation. In Ieland about 32% of the land is suitable fo NGM species. The most suitable soils ae pincipally Othic Luvisols. About 43% of the land is unsuitable because of inadequate aeation. This sevee estiction mainly occus on Gleysols, Placic Podzols and Histosols. Anothe 24% of the land is unsuitable because of fetility limitations. Most Dystic Lithosols, Dystic Cambisols and Othic Podzols have this advese quality. Ieland is not futhe subdivided into NUTS-1 egions. In Denmak 52% of the land is suitable fo NGM species. This pecentage is the highest of all the EC membe counties. The most suitable soils ae Eutic Canbisols and Othic Luvisols. The dominant limitation is the poo fetility status of the Dysmc Regosols and Podzols. Denmak is not futhe subdivided into NUTS-1 egions. In Geece no land without limitations fo NGM species occus, and no moe than 8% of the land has modeate limitations. On the othe 92% of Geek land, sevee limitations fo NGM.species wee assessed to occu. The modeate limitations occu on Fluvisols. In Geece, the main limiting facto is a high soil wate deficit which occus on about 78% of the land and includes almost evey soil type. This indicates

58 the impotance of an adequate soil wate supply capacity. The NUTS-1 egion Noth has the highest pecentage of suitable land, i.e. 11%. The egions East and South have the lowest pecentage, i.e. 2%. This diffeence between the noth and south is because of the Fluvisols which ae mainly situated in the noth of Geece. Svain has about 9% of land with no o modeate limitations fo NGM species. No limitations occu on no moe than 1% of Spanish land, which is chiefly coveed by Calcaic Canbisols. Modeate limitations can mainly be found on Fluvisols. The most suitable egions ae Noeste and Madid whee about 15% of the land has no o modeate limitations. In these egions, elatively lage aeas of Fluvisols occu. The least suitable NUTS-1 egion is Su with no moe than 5% of suitable land. 84% of this egion is unsuitable because of a sevee soil wate deficit. On Map 2, these diffeences ae not visible because all Spanish NUTS-1 egions ae classified unde the devision of 0-20% suitable land. Map 5 offes a bette insight into the dispesal. In Potugal only 4% of the land is suitable fo NGM species. Hence, Potugal has the smallest aea of suitable land fo NGM species of all the EC membe counties. The suitable soils compise Eutic Fluvisols, Calcaic o Chomic Canbisols, and Othic, Calcic o Calcaic Luvisols. About 43% of Potuguese land is unsuitable because of a sevee soil wate deficit and 47% is unsuitable because of a poo fetility status. The latte estiction mainly occus in NUTS-1 egion Note do Continente on Canbisols. A sevee soil wate deficit mainly occus in Sud do Continente whee potential tanspiation is vey high. Nomal gowing less demanding tee species Suitability at EC level Of the total aea of the EC, about 34% (Table 17) has no limitations fo nomal gowing less demanding tee species (NGL species), and 14% has modeate limitations. The total aea of suitable land, viz. 48% of EC land, is the highest pecentage fo the thee goups of tee species consideed in this study. This is not supising as NGL species demand the lowest equiements of the land. A sevee soil wate deficit is by fa the most impotant limitation within the EC fo NGL species. About 40% of the EC has such a sevee soil wate deficit, and on anothe 6% of the EC sevee management limitations occu. Nothwest Euope has lage aeas of suitable land fo NGL species (Map 3). Simila to the othe goups of tee species, it is mainly a sevee soil wate deficit that pevents land being evaluated as suitable fo NGL species. Most of the egions in Spain, Potugal and Geece ae suitable fo no moe than 20%. In Ieland and the south of the United Kingdom 60-80% of the aea has no limitations. The suitability of NGL species is given fo each membe county of the EC in Table 20. The suitability pe NUTS-1 egion is given in Appendix 6.

59 Table 20 Total aeas (km2) and pecentages (%) of suiobilio classes fo nomal nowinn less demandinn tee species fo the membe counties of the Euopean Communities Suitability class1) County West-Gemany Fance (km2) (%I. (km2) Luxemboug United Kingdom (km2) (%) (km2) (%I Potugal (km2) 1) 1 = no limitations, 2 = modeate limitations, 3 = sevee limitations, 4 = sevee management limitations only. The lagest aea in a membe state of the EC with no o modeate limitations fo NGL species was found in Fance, i.e. about 39 million hectaes, which is about 71% of the land (Table 20). The second lagest aea was in Gemany whee 21 million hectaes o 84% of the land has no o modeate limitations. The smallest aea of suitable land was found in Luxemboug whee no moe than 0.2 million hectaes o 70% has no o modeate limitations. The highest pecentage of suitable land was found in Belgium and Denmak, viz. 93%. Belgium has the highest pecentage of land with no limitation, namely 76%. The lowest pecentages of suitable land wee

60 found in Geece and Potugal, whee no moe than about 9% of the land was suitable. In these counties, the soil wate deficit is so high that tee gowth is seiously educed on most soils. Suitability at county and NUTS-1 level About 84% of Gemanv has no o modeate limitations fo NGL species. The majo well suitable soils ae Eutic and Dystic Cambisols, Othic Luvisols, Dystic Podzoluvisols and Podzols. The main estiction is poo soil aeation on about 9% of Geman land which is coveed with Gleysols, Gleyic Cambisols and Eutic Histosols. On about 5% of Geman land, sevee management limitations pevail. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae Hessen, Schleswig-Holstein, Bemen, Nodhein- Westfalen, Rheinland-Pfalz and Saaland whee about 90% of the land is suitable. In these egions, lage aeas of Dystic Cambisols and Othic Luvisols occu. The least suitable egion is Bayen whee 77% of the land is suitable. About 10% of the land in Bayen has sevee aeation poblems fo NGL species. This land mainly consists of Cambisols and Eutic Histosols. Futhemoe, about 10% has sevee management limitations only. In Fance 71 % of the land has no o modeate limitations fo NGL species. The most suitable soils ae mainly all kinds of Cambisols and Luvisols. A sevee soil wate deficit is the main limitation on 21% of the Fench land. This may occu on vaious soil types. On about 7% of Fench land, which is often coveed with Cambisols sevee management limitations pevail. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae Nodpas-de-Calais (92%), Ile de Fance (83%), Bassin Paisien (83%), Sud-Ouest (81%) and Ouest (85% of NUTS-1 aea). The least suitable NUTS-1 egion in Fance is the Mediteanean whee 27% has no o modeate limitations. A sevee soil wate deficit is the most impotant limiting facto on about 61% of the land in this egion and occus on nealy all soil types. About 36% of has no o modeate limitations fo NGL species. The most suitable soils ae mainly Eutic, Calcaic and Dystic Cambisols, Othic Luvisols and Dystic Lithosols. The main estiction is a sevee soil wate deficit which pevails on about 53% of Italian land. About 9% is unsuitable because of sevee management limitations. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae found in the nothen pat of the county: both Nod-Est and Lombadia ae suitable fo about 71% of the NUTS-1 aea. In these egions, elatively lage aeas of favouable Cambisols and Luvisols ae found. Compaed with many othe egions, the potential tanspiation in these egions is elatively low, which means that the soil wate supply capacity of these soils is sufficient to fulfil demand. The least suitable NUTS-1 egion is Sadegna whee 15% of the land is classified as suitable. Thee, potential tanspiation and the pecipitation deficit ae vey high. The latte can each 500 mm. In the Nethelands 88% is suitable fo NGL species. The most suitable soils ae chiefly Calcic, Dystic and Gleyic Cambisols, Othic, Humic and Gleyic Podzols and Othic Luvisols. The main limitation is poo soil aeation which occus on 11% of Dutch land. Poo aeation is pincipally found on Eutic Histosols and Gleysols. The most suitable NUTS-1 egions ae East and South Nethelands with 96% and 99%

61 of suitable land espectively. In these egions, lage aeas of Podzols and Cambisols occu. The least suitable NUTS-1 egion, West Nethelands, has 77% suitable land. In this egion, lage aeas of Eutic Histosols occu which have sevee aeation o management limitations. In Belgium 93% of the land is suitable fo NGL species. Of the EC membe counties, both Belgium and Denmak have the highest pecentage of suitable land fo NGL species. The most suitable soils ae mainly Othic Luvisols, Podzoluvisols and Podzols. Most Regosols and Cambisols ae also suitable. The main limitation is a soil wate deficit combined with management limitations on about 4% of Belgian land. These combined limitations mainly occu on Dystic Cambisols and Othic Luvisols. In Luxemboug 70% of the teitoy is suitable. The most suitable soils ae mainly Eutic, Dystic and Vetic Cambisols. About 25% of the land has sevee aeation limitations, which chiefly occu on Stagno Gleyic Luvisols. Luxemboug is not futhe subdivided into NUTS-1 egions. The United Kingdom has about 57% land with no o modeate limitations fo NGL species. The most suitable soils ae mainly Calcic Gleyic Fluvisols, Dystic, Eutic and Gleyic Calcic Cambisols, Gleyic Podzols, and Stagno Gleyic Luvisols. The most suitable NUTS-1 egion is the South West whee 82% of the land has no o modeate limitations. In this egion, Othic and Chomic Luvisols as well as Eutic, Dystic and Gleyic Cambisols fequently occu. The least suitable NUTS-1 egions ae the Noth and Noth West whee 20% of the egion is suitable. In these egions, vast aeas occu with peched watetables. About 73% of Ieland has no o modeate limitations fo NGL species. The majo pat of the most suitable soils ae Eutic and Dystic Cambisols, Othic Luvisols, and Othic Podzols. The dominant limitation is caused by poo soil aeation which occus on 25% of Iish land. The land with poo soil aeation is mainly coveed with Gleysols. Ieland is not futhe subdivided into NUTS-1 egions. In Denmak about 93% of the land has no o modeate limitations fo NGL species. This is the highest pecentage found within the EC and equals the pecentage of suitable land in Belgium. The most suitable soils ae pincipally Eutic Cambisols and Othic Luvisols. Poo soil aeation is by fa the main limitation. Poo aeation occus on 8% of the land, which is mainly coveed with Humic Gleysols. Denmak is not futhe subdivided into NUTS-1 egions. In Geece about 9% of the land is suitable fo NGL species. This pecentage, togethe with that of Potugal is, the lowest within the EC. The most suitable soils, which mainly compise Huvi Calcaic Fluvisols, still have modeate limitations. On all othe soils, a sevee soil wate deficit is the pedominant estiction. The most suitable NUTS-1 egion is the Noth whee 12% of the land has modeate limitations. This land is coveed with Fluvisols. Fo the East and Southen Islands egion no moe then 3% of the land is suitable. Thee, lage aeas of Lithosols occu in which the ooting depth is shallow (10-40 cm) wheeas the pecipitation deficit is high.

62 In S~ain 14% of the land has no o modeate limitations fo NGL species. The most suitable soils ae Calcic Cambisols. Some Humic Podzols, Gleyic Cambisols, Rhodo Chomic Luvisols, Vetic Andosols and Rankes ae also suitable. The main limitation is a sevee soil wate deficit on about 82% of Spanish land. The most suitable NUTS- 1 egion is Nooeste whee 30% of the land is suitable. The least suitable egion is Su whee no moe than 5% is suitable. In Potugal 9% of the land is suitable fo NGL species. Togethe with Geece this is the lowest pecentage within the EC. The most suitable soils ae Chomic Cambisols. The main limiting facto is a sevee soil wate deficit on 87% of the land. A sevee deficit occus on many soil types because of the high potential tanspiation. The most suitable NUTS-1 egion is Note do Continente whee 11% of the land is suitable. Because Potugal is subdivided into two NUTS-1 egions, the othe NUTS-1 egion, Sud do Continente, becomes the least suitable with 7% of suitable land. In this egion, potential tanspiation is highe than in the nothen egion, wheeby the soil wate deficit also becomes highe. Competitive land fo foest tees and othe cop types Aeas of land of a NUTS-1 egion, suitable fo both foest tees and othe cop types (e.g. intensively managed gass, ceeals and oot cops) wee estimated. This land was indicated as competitive land. Because of the diffeent equiements, and hence, diffeent suitable aeas, the pocedue was epeated thee times, viz. fo fast gowing, nomal gowing moe demanding and nomal gowing less demanding tee species. Futhemoe, the aea that was only suitable fo one of the thee goups of tee species o only fo the othe type of cop was assessed. Moeove, the common aea of unsuitable land was estimated. The estimation pocedue is explained in Chapte 4. Futhe explanation can also be found in this section whee competitive suitable land fo fuit tees and othe cops is discussed. In the following section competitive land fo each of the thee goups of tee species is dealt with sepaately. Competitive land fo fast gowing tee species and othe cop types. Appendix 7 (fist column) illustates that high pecentages of competitive land (> 50% of the NUTS-1 egion) occu in Bemen (Gemany), Nod-Pasde-Calais (Fance), West Nethelands, Denmak, East Anglia, East and West Midlands, and the South East (United Kingdom). These high pecentages pincipally efe to gass. In Bemen, Nod-Pas-de-Calais, West Nethelands, and Denmak, suitable land fo fast gowing tees also competes with ceeals. The pecentage of land on which fast gowing tees compete with oot cops is usually lowe than the pecentage fo ceeals. If we conside Appendix 7 it is stiking that in nealy all cases the pecentage of competitive land (fist column) is highe than the pecentage of land only suitable fo FG species (second column). Thee ae exceptions in most of the UK and half of the Geman NUTS-1 egions whee the pecentage of competitive land with oot cops is lowe than the pecentage only suitable fo FG species. In these egions, lage aeas of Othic Luvisols and Gleysols occu on which fast gowing tees gow vey well but oot cops have aeation o wokability limitations. Anothe stiking point is the pecentage of land only suitable fo gass, ceeals o oot cops (thid column) which, in many cases, is highe than the pecentage of land only suitable fo FG species. Thee ae two easons fo this. Fist, a soil wate deficit is moe

63 limiting fo fast gowing tees than fo the agicultual cops consideed. FG species can achieve a good yield if thee is a lage and pemanent supply of soil wate. It is likely that agicultual cops can adapt to less. Second, is the diffeence in impotance of the natual fetility status between fast gowing tees and agicultual cops. A stating point fo evaluating the land evaluation units fo fast gowing tees was thei natual status without any impovement to the soil, such as fetilization. Hence, the natual fetility status may be a limiting facto fo foest tees. The potential of agicultual cops was assessed without taking natual fetility into account because of the egula nutient inputs. Fo such cops, natual fetility is neve a limitation. The fouth and last column of Appendix 7 specifies the pecentage of land of each NUTS-1 egion which is unsuitable fo FG species, gass, ceeals and oot cops. The pecentages fo some egions, especially the Mediteanean ones, may be vey high (moe than 80%). The easons fo this, such as a sevee soil wate deficit, ae stated ealie in of this Section. Competitive land fo nomal gowing moe demanding tee species High pecentages with competitive land (> 50% of the NUTS-1 egion) between nomal gowing moe demanding tee species (NGM-species) occu in Bemen (Gemany), Bassin Paisien, Nod-Pas-de-Calais, Est, Ouest (Fance), West Nethelands and Denmak (Appendix 8). Vey low pecentages of competitive land (< 5% of the NUTS-1 egion) occu in Lazio, Sud, Sicilia, Sadegna (Italy), the Noth, Nothen Ieland (United Kingdom), East and Southen Islands (Geece), Nooeste, Su (Spain) and Note do Continente (Potugal). In these egions, the pecentage of competitive land is low because the total pecentage of suitable land is vey low. Hence, thee is no land to compete fo. The second column of Appendix 8 gives the pecentage of land which is only suitable fo NGM species. It is stiking that in nealy all egions, the pecentage of land only suitable fo NGM species and not fo oot.cops is (much) highe than the pecentage not suitable fo gass and ceeals. Root cops, howeve, demand additional equiements of the land compaed with ceeals and gass (e.g. wokability, stoniness, aeation). In seveal Geman, Bitish, Belgian, Dutch and Spanish egions the pecentage of land only suitable fo agicultual cops (Appendix 8 thid column) is elatively high. The fetility status of the soil, which places no estictions on the agicultual cops because of atificial nutient inputs causes the diffeent suitability assessment compaed with NGM species. The last column of Appendix 8 specifies the pecentage of land of each NUTS-1 egion unsuitable fo all cop types. Simila to the fast gowing tees, in most Mediteanean egions, the pecentage of unsuitable land fo NGM species and agicultual cops is high. Competitive land fo nomal gowing less demanding tee species Appendix 9 gives the estimated competitive pecentages of land, and the pecentages of common unsuitable land fo nomal gowing less demanding tee species (NGL species) and thee goups of agicultual cops (e.g. gass, ceeals, oot cops). Futhemoe, the pecentage of land only suitable fo NGL species o one of the thee othe cop types is pesented. The high pecentages of competitive land in many of the NUTS-1 egions ae stiking. Theefoe, the pecentages that ae only suitable fo othe cop types ae low. Exceptions ae the pecentages of land only suitable fo gass in the NUTS-1 egions of the United Kingdom, Spain and Potugal as well

64 as fo ceeals in Spain and Potugal, which ae elatively high. Of the thee goups of tee species, the goup of NGL species, has the highest pecentage of land which is only suitable fo these types of tees. Thus, as expected, NGL species have diffeent and lowe demands than the agicultual cops. Howeve, thee ae egions with a vey high pecentage of land which is unsuitable fo NGL species and all the agicultual cop types consideed: examples ae Lazio, Campania and Sadegna (Italy), Noth, Cental and East and Southen Islands (Geece) which have 80% o moe of unsuitable land. The easons fo this, such as sevee soil wate deficit, have aleady been given in of this Section. 5.2 Rainfed and iigated fuit tees The pincipal EC aeas fo fuit tees (excluding olives and citus) ae located in Spain, Italy, Fance, Potugal and Geece (Euostat, 1988). They cove about 95% of the EC aea, and poduce about 75% of all the fuit havested in the Euopean Communities. Howeve, fuit tees can gow in all the membe states of the Euopean Communities. In Scotland and Ieland, it is likely that fuit tees can only develop on shelteed and elatively dy and sunny locations. Fo instance, slightly less than 2000 hectaes of apple ochads occu in Nothen Ieland, and in Ieland thee ae only 1300 hectaes, mainly localized in the south and east (Hough, 1990). Accoding to Than and Boekhuizen (1965) only in the vey nothen pat of the UK does the climate not allow fuit gowing. In Scotland theefoe, the ochad aea is small (Hough, 1990). In this section, the suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of tees poducing fuit will be pesented. This suitability assessment will be of a geneal natue. So, land will only be evaluated fo geneal climatic and soil equiements which ae elevant fo a boad goup of fuit tees. The tees of this boad goup have one paticula popety in common, viz. the tees consideed have a low dought susceptibility. Fuit tees with moe specific equiements, fo example citus, olives and gapes ae widely discussed in othe sections of this epot. Fist, the geneally applicable climatic and soil equiements ae explained. Next, the pecentages of well suitable, modeately suitable and unsuitable land fo each NUTS-1 egion ae given. Finally, some esults ae pesented on how fa suitable land fo the boad goup of fuit tees coincides with suitable land fo gass, ceeals and oot cops Evaluation citeia Geneally applicable soil and climatic equiements ae dealt with to evaluate EC land fo its potential to gow tees which poduce fesh fuit. We have assumed that tees poducing fuit can be gown in each county within the Euopean Communities. In this section, no paticula fuit tee species is defined, such as apple, peach, chey etc. EC land will only be evaluated fo geneal equiements. When the suitability fo a paticula fuit tee needs to be known fo detailed investigations, moe specific

65 climatic equiements should be included. In paticula, it is the tempeatue egime that govens the egional cultivation possibilities of cetain fuit tee species. Fo instance, the main woody fuit cops, e.g. apple, pea, peach, apicot and chey, have distinctly diffeent heat equiements (e.g. Papadakis, 1970). Pea is less winte esistant than apple, and its heat equiements ae a little highe. Chey also is less winte esistant than apple, but its chilling equiements ae pehaps as high of those of apple. The heat demands of chey ae compaable with those of apple. Apicot and peach have appoximately the same climatic equiements. The chilling demands of both cops ae lowe than those of apple. Howeve, apicot is moe susceptible to ealy night fosts than peach. Konenbeg (1989) pointed out that even among the cultivas of a cetain fuit tee cop, diffeences occu in the equied tempeatue egime. He showed that the nothen limit of the apple cultiva 'Cox's Oange Pippin' follows a line fom cental England though the south of Noway, wheeas the cultiva 'Ganny Smith' has its nothen bounday appoximately though the middle of Fance. The numbe of fuit tee species and cultivas which can gow in the diffeent EC egions will vay depending on the pevailing tempeatue egime. Howeve, we assumed that the tempeatue egime of each administative egion (NUTS-1 level) allows at least one fuit tee cop to be cultivated. Apples can usually be gown in the nothen membe states, wheeas peaches can be cultivated in the southen membe states. The evaluation citeia fo the cultivation of fuit tees wee subdivided into geneal soil and climatic equiements. Two diffeent management situations wee defined, namely a ainfed situation and a situation with iigation. In both situations pope management was assumed to pevail (e.g. selection of appopiate ootstocks, puning, application of nutients and pesticides, establishment of windbeaks, late night fost potection by spinkling etc.). Climatic citeia Geneally, tees poducing fuit ae susceptible to dought. Hence, unde ainfed conditions, it was assumed that dought susceptibility of EC land should be evaluated. Fist, it is elevant to conside the mean annual pecipitation deficit. The mean pecipitation deficit has been defined as the sum of the diffeence between the monthly potential evapotanspiation and ainfall in months having a deficit (Chapte 3). The mean annual pecipitation deficit vaies fom less than 100 mm in the nothen membe states to moe than 400 mm in the southen membe states. In some pats of Southen Potugal and Spain, the deficit amounts to moe than 800 mm. In aeas with a mean annual pecipitation deficit of less than 50 mn, no limitations wee assumed to occu. This amount of wate can easily be supplied by available soil wate. In aeas with highe mean annual pecipitation deficits, soil chaacteistics wee consideed to appaise the dought susceptibility of the land. As mentioned above, when assessing the potential fo the boad goup of fuit tees, no tempeatue equiements wee taken into account.

66 Soil citeia Dought susceptibility The dought susceptibility of land evaluation units located in aeas with a mean annual pecipitation deficit highe than 50 mm, was detemined by analysing soil dainage, soil textue, soil depth and soil phase (Appendix 2). The tee with decision ules is too detailed fo a full pesentation. Hence, only the pincipal citeia captued in the decision tee ae outlined. Non-mineal soils (Histosols) wee assumed to have a low dought susceptibility, iespective of the mean annual pecipitation deficit (Table 21). In aeas with a pecipitation deficit of between 50 mm and 100 mm only the excessively dained mineal soils wee assumed to have modeate estictions fo poducing fuit. All othe soils in these aeas ae wette, and wee theefoe consideed to have no dought limitations. The modeately well and well dained, coase textued soils ae an exception. These soils have modeate constaints. In ago-climatic egions whee the deficit vaies between 100 mm and 300 mm, all modeately well, well, and excessively dained soils wee expected to have modeate o sevee limitations. In aeas with a deficit highe than 300 mm, the tempoaily pooly and impefectly dained soils wee also assumed to have limitations. If these soils have othe dawbacks (e.g. a shallow soil depth o a coase textue) sevee limitations wee assumed to pevail. The vey pooly and pooly dained soils wee usually expected to have no dought poblems. Vey shallow and shallow soils (soil depth c40 cm) do not supply sufficient soil wate to the fuit tees to cove long ainless peiods. So, in aeas with a mean annual pecipitation deficit of highe than 50 mm these soils wee assumed to be unsuitable because of a high dought susceptibility. In aeas with a pecipitation deficit of moe than 300 mm even the modeately shallow soils (depth <60 cm) wee appaised to be unsuitable fo poducing fuit. The dought susceptibility of soils with a soil depth of moe than 60 cm, was assumed to depend on the soil textue, and the pesence of soil phases. Geneally, the coase textued o heavy textued soils wee assumed to have moe estictions than medium, medium fine o fine textued soils. The occuence of soil phases (e.g. gavelly, stony, lithic phases) was estimated to advesely affect the suitability fo fuit poducing compaed with simila soils without phases. When the mean annual pecipitation deficit is elatively low ( mm) the pesence of a soil phase was assumed to be a modeate estiction. Howeve, in aeas with a highe pecipitation deficit, soils with a soil phase wee assumed to be unsuitable. An exception was made fo soils located in ago-climatic egions with a deficit of between 100 mm and 200 mm, with soil depths of moe than 60 cm, and with a medium, medium fine o fine soil textue. This goup of soils was appaised to have modeate limitations. Dought susceptibility was evaluated fo ainfed conditions only. Iigated fuit tees wee not expected to have dought stess. Salinity and alkalinity Geneally, soils which have an electical conductivity of moe than 4 mmho/cm (saline soils o soils with a saline phase) o an exchangeable sodium pecentage of

67 moe than 15% (alkaline soils o soils with a sodic phase) wee consideed unsuitable fo fuit poduction. Although iigation wate can be applied to leach soluble salts no diffeence was made between ainfed and iigated conditions. Soil-physical quality Land with vey shallow o shallow soils (soil depth <40 cm)) was expected to be unsuitable to cultivate fuit tees. In these conditions the soil depth is inadequate to povide sufficient foothold fo the tee oots. Modeately shallow and modeately deep soils (soil depth: cm and cm, espectively) wee assumed to have estictions, depending on the pesence of a soil phase (e.g. stony, lithic phase). Modeately shallow soils with a soil phase wee assumed to be unsuitable, and modeately deep soils with a soil phase wee assumed to have modeate estictions fo fuit poduction. Peat soils, and fine textued and vey fine textued soils (clay content >35%) wee consideed to be unsuitable fo poducing fuit. The high clay content of the mineal soils usually esults in a low vetical pemeability, especially in the subsoil, which seveely hampes fuit poduction. No diffeence in the evaluation of the soil-physical quality of a land evaluation unit was made between ainfed and iigated conditions. Natual soil fetility A low cation exchange capacity (CEC <5 meq/100 gam soil) was expected to epesent conditions with modeate estictions fo fuit gowing, both unde ainfed and iigated conditions. In this case, the nutient etention capacity is low, which could easily lead to leaching beyond the oot zone. To minimize this, small quantities of fetilize should be applied fequently. The pesence of gypsum was also expected to cause modeate limitations. Soil dainage Vey pooly dained and pooly dained soils wee consideed to be unsuitable fo the cultivation of fuit tees. Lack of oxygen will fequently pevail. Howeve, modeately well dained, well dained and excessively dained soils will seldom have aeation poblems. So, these soils wee evaluated as being suitable with no estictions. Soils with a tempoaily poo dainage o impefect dainage belong to an intemediate goup. In such cases the suitability was assumed to depend on the soil textue and wetness of the climate. The wetness of the climate is chaacteized by the mean annual pecipitation deficit. Coase textued, medium textued, and medium fine textued soils, which ae tempoaily pooly dained, wee consideed to have sevee estictions in elatively wet egions (pecipitation deficit <200 mm). In the die egions (pecipitation deficit >200 mm) modeate estictions occu in these soils. Fine textued and vey fine textued soils with a tempoaily pooly dainage wee assumed to have sevee estictions iespective of the wetness of the climate. An impefectly dained soil with a coase textue, a medium textue, o a medium fine textue was assumed to have no estictions. Soil with a simila dainage but a highe clay content (fine textue and vey fine textue) wee consideed to have

68 no estictions in the elatively die egions (pecipitation deficit >200 mm). In egions with a smalle mean annual pecipitation deficit, fine textued and vey fine textued soils wee expected to have modeate o sevee estictions. Modeate estictions occu as long as the pecipitation deficit is highe than 50 mm, and sevee estictions pevail unde wette conditions. No diffeence in the evaluation of the dainage of a land evaluation unit was made between ainfed and iigated conditions. Slope Mechanized opeations on a fuit poducing entepise ae hampeed o even impossible on land located on slopes. Moeove, possible wate eosion on sloping land must be contolled by soil consevation measues. As light equipment is geneally used, fuit tee cultivation can cope moe easily with slopes than, fo instance, aable faming. Futhemoe, ochads ae usually patly coveed with gass which educes eosion. So, land on slopes no steepe than 15% was expected to have no o only slight estictions fo fuit tee cultivation. On land with modeately steep slopes (1525%) modeate estictions wee consideed to occu. Steep. slopes (>25%) ae assumed to be unsuitable. The above-mentioned evaluation of the slope efes to fuit cultivation unde ainfed conditions. If iigation is applied, the equiements ae highe. Moe opeations need to be caied out, so slopes ae moe of a hindance. On sloping land, iegula wetting of the soil may aise depending on the iigation system used. Futhemoe, moe enegy is usually equied to supply wate to fuit cops on slopes. Hence, sloping land (8-15%) was evaluated to impose modeate estictions, wheeas modeately steep slopes (15-25%) wee assumed to be unsuitable fo the cultivation of fuit tees. No diffeences wee made in the evaluation of level land (~8%) o land located on steep slopes (>25%) unde ainfed o iigated conditions. The fome was expected to have no poblems, and the latte was assumed to impose sevee limitations fo the cultivation of fuit tees. The above-mentioned geneal climatic and soil equiements ae summaized in Table 21. Table 21 Summay of geneal climatic and soil citeia to evaluate EC land fo the cultivation of fuit tees Requiement Limitation no modeate sevee Soil-physical quality * -soils with depth between cm and without a soil phase -soils with depth >80 cm, iespective of soil phases -soils with depth between cm and without a a soil phase -soils with depth between cm with a soil phase -soils with depth 4 0 cm, iespective of soil phases -soils with depth between cm with a soil phase * -coase, medium, o medium fine textued soils -peat soils -fine o finetextued soils

69 - Requiement Limitation no modeate sevee Soil dainage * -modeately good, good, o excessively dained soils -impefectly dained soils with a coase, medium, o medium fine soil textue in all ago-climatic egions -impefectly dained soils with a fine o vey fine soil textue and an ETdP >200 mm -tempoaily pooly dained soils with a coase, medium o medium fine textued soils and an ETp-P >ZOO mm2) -impefectly dained soils with a fine, o a vey fine soil textue and an ET -P between mm -vey pooly o pooly dained soils -tempoaily pooly dained soils with a fine, o a vey fine soil textue in all agoclimatic egions -tempoaily pooly dained soils with a coase, medium, medium, o a medium fine soil textue and an ETp-P ~ 200 mm Slope * ainfed <I5 % ainfed 1525% ainfed >25 % * iigated <8 % iigated iigated >I5 % Natual soil fetility * absence of gy psum CEC <5 pesence of gy Psum Salinity and alkalinity EC~) <4 n.. ESP >15% Dought susceptibility * peat soils in all ago-climatic egions soils with a depth <40 cm in all ago-climatic egions * egions with an ET -P 40mm -alfmineal soils with a soil depth >40cm * ETp-P mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth between cm, without a soil phase, and a vey pooly, a pooly, a tempoa- ETp-P =SO-100 mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth between cm, without a soil phase, and a modeately well, well,

70 Requiement Limitation no modeate sevee ily pooly, o an impefectly dained soil -medium, medium, fine, o fine textued soils, with a depth >40 cm, without a soil phase, and not excessively dained * ETp-P =loo-200 mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a,soil depth between cm, without a soil phase, and a vey pooly, a pooly, a tempoaily pooly, o an impefectly dained soil -medium, medium fine, o 'fine textued soils with a soil depth between cm, without a soil phase, and a vey pooly, a pooly, a tempoaily pooly, o an impefectly dained soil -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth >60 cm without a soil phase, iespective of soil dainage o excessive soil dainage -medium, medium, fine, o fine textued soils, with a depth >40 cm, without a soil phase, and a excessively soil dainage -all mineal soils with a soil depth >40 cm, and with a soil phase ETp-P d mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth between cm, without a soil phase, and a modeately well dained soil -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth between cm, without a soil phase, and a modeately well soil dainage -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth >60 cm, with a soil phase, and iespective of soil dainage ETfP =loo-200 mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth between cm, and with a soil phase -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth between cm, and with a modeately well, a well, o an excessive soil dainage -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth between cm, and a soil phase -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth between cm, and a good, o an excessive soil dainage * ETp-P ~ mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth > 60cm, without a soil phase, and a vey poo, ETp-P = mm El',-P =200-? mm -vey fine o -vey fine o coase textued coase textued soils with a soil soils with a soil depth between depth > 40cm, with cm, without have a soil phase a soil phase and a -vey fine o

71 Requiement Limitation modeate sevee poo, tempoaily poo o impefect soil dainage -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth > 40cm and a vey poo, poo, tempoaily poo o impefect soil dainage a soil depth >60 cm and with a modeately good o good soil dainage * ETP-P >300 mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth >60 cm, without a soil phase, and with a vey poo, o poo soil dainage -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth >60 cm and with a vey poo, a poo, tempoaily poo, o impefect soil dainage vey poo, poo, tempoaily poo, o impefect soil dainage -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth >60 cm with a soil phase -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with -medium, medium fine o fine textued soils with a soil depth between cm, and with a modeately good, good, o excessively good dainage -medium, medium fine, o fine textued soils with a soil depth >60 cm, and excessive soil dainage ETp-P ~ 300 mm -vey fine o coase textued soils with a soil depth >60 cm, without a soil phase, and with a tempoaily poo, o impefect soil dainage coase textued soils with a soil depth > 40cm, and a modeately good, good, o excessively good soil dainage -medium, medium fine o fine textued soils with a soil depth between cm, and with a soil phase ETp-P >300 mm -so~ls with a soil depth between cm -soils with a soil phase -soils with a modeately good, good, o excessively good soil dainage ') n..: limitations does not pevail; 2, annual pecipitation deficit; ') CEC: cation exchange capacity (in meq/100 g. soil); 4, EC: electic conductivity (in mmho/cm); ESP: exchangeable sodium pecentage;

72 5.2.2 Suitability fo fuit In this section the suitability fo the cultivation of fuit tees in the Euopean Communities is explained. The suitability is pesented fo both ainfed and iigated conditions. Land with no o modeate limitations is efeed to as suitable land. Some yield data ae also povided. Finally, some infomation is given on how fa suitable land fo fuit tee cultivation is competitive with othe types of land use, such as wheat-gowing o the cultivation of oot cops. Suitability fo fuit tee cultivation The suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of fuit tees was qualitatively analysed using ALES. Fo each of the appoximately 2800 land evaluation units (unique combinations of soil and climate) the pecentage of the aea having no, modeate o sevee limitations was detemined. As the land use equiements diffe between ainfed and iigated conditions, the evaluation was caied out sepaately. Suitability was detemined by using the so-called maximum limitation method (e.g. Sys, 1985; Rossite, 1990). So, the maximum limitation of one paticula climatic o soil popety of a land evaluation unit detemines the suitability, iespective of all the othe climatic and soil popeties. The esults fo each evaluation unit wee too detailed fo futhe pocessing by the Dutch Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy in the subsequent poject phase. Hence the esults wee aggegated to obtain weighted aveage figues fo the EC administative egions at NUTS-1 level. In Appendices 10 and 12 the suitability fo the NUTS-1 egions is pesented fo ainfed and iigated conditions, espectively. Maps 7 and 8 give the pecentage of land fo each NUTS-1 egion, which has no limitations fo fuit tee cultivation. Suitability fo ainfed fuit tee cultivation About 14% of EC land has no estictions fo gowing fuit unde ainfed conditions. On the othe hand about 73% of EC land has sevee dawbacks. A sevee soil wate deficit is the most pominent eason fo evaluating EC land as unsuitable (about 53% of the aea). A poo soil-physical quality is anothe impotant chaacteistic which inhibits fuit gowing (about 50% of EC land). Of couse land occus which has both a poo soil-physical quality and a high soil wate deficit. Unsuitable land fo ainfed fuit gowing is not equally distibuted thoughout the EC (Table 22). High pecentages of land (>20% of the county) without limitations can be found in the Fedeal Republic of Gemany, Fance, Belgium, Ieland and Denmak. Low pecen- ' tages of land with no limitations (~10% of the county) occu in the Mediteanean counties and Luxemboug. Luxemboug has a elatively high pecentage of land with modeate estictions fo the cultivation of fuit tees. The Mediteanean counties ae mainly unsuitable (90% of the land o moe has sevee estictions). A sevee soil wate deficit is the main eason. The Nethelands and the United Kingdom also have a elatively high pecentage of unsuitable land. A poo soil-physical quality is the main eason fo land to be evaluated as unsuitable in these counties (75% and 50% of the county, espectively).

73 Table 22 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo ainfed fuit tee gowing County limitations -- - no modeate sevee Fed. Rep. of Gemany Fance Italy Nethelands Belgium Luxemboug United Kingdom Ieland Denmak Geece Spain Potugal Relatively high pecentages of land (>20% of NUTS1 aea) with no estictions fo ainfed fuit tee cultivation occu in a zone fom southwest Fance along the West Euopean coast to Denmak (Map 7 and appendix 10). Futhemoe, cental and southen Gemany, Ieland and southen England belong to the zone with a high pecentage of suitable land fo fuit gowing. The westen and nothen pat of the Nethelands, and South Gemany ae excluded fom this zone. Relatively low pecentages of land (~10% of NUTS-1 aea) with no estictions can be found in NUTS-1 egions in Potugal, Italy, Geece and in the easten and southens pat of Fance. Also, in the westen pat of the Fedeal Republic of Gemany (Saabiicken) and in easten Fance (Est) less land without dawbacks occus. In the NUTS-1 egions of the Mediteanean zone a sevee soil wate deficit is the main eason. The NUTS-1 egions in Gemany and Fance just mentioned have vast aeas with a poo soil-physical quality (about 60% of the NUTS-1 egion). In Cente-Est (F) only a low pecentage of land with no estictions occus because of both a poo soil physical quality and a sevee soil wate deficit (50% of the NUTS-1 egion). The situation in the Mediteanean aea (F) is compaable to that in extensive aeas in Potugal, Spain, Italy and Geece. The land is pedominantly unsuitable because of sevee soil wate deficit poblems (85% of moe of the aea). The NUTS-1 egion in Madid (Sp) has a elatively high pecentage of land without fuit gowing poblems (16%). Howeve, the pecentage of land with sevee poblems (84%) is simila to that in adjacent NUTS-1 egions. Suitability fo iigated fuit tee cultivation When iigation is assumed to be applied the aea of unsuitable land in the EC slightly deceases fom 73% to 69%. Although soil wate deficit is no longe a limiting facto, the aea of land with no limitations still deceases fom 14% to 11% of EC land. The eason fo this is the highe demands of iigated fuit tee cultivation on the slopes. The slope of well suitable land fo iigated fuit gowing was not expected to exceed 8%. Fo ainfed conditions the demands ae lowe. Thus, slopes between 8% and 15% ae still assumed to epesent conditions with no limitations.

74 About 32% of EC land has slopes of between 8% and 15%. If no othe limitations occu this land is evaluated as well suitable unde ainfed conditions and as modeately suitable unde iigated conditions. In fact, othe limitations also often occu; so only 9% of EC land was evaluated as modeately suitable instead of well suitable fo iigated fuit poduction because of the highe slope equiements. A poo soil-physical quality (50% of EC land) is the pincipal eason fo land to be evaluated as unsuitable fo iigated fuit gowing in the EC. The second impotant eason is the steepness of the slopes (about 38% of EC land). Simila to ainfed conditions, the aea of suitable land fo iigated fuit tee cultivation is not equally distibuted thoughout the EC (Table 23). In the southen membe states the pecentage of unsuitable land is usually highe than in the nothen membe states. Table 23 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitah'ons) fo im'gated fuit tee gowing County limitations no modeate sevee Fed. Rep. of Gemany Fance Italy 6 '11 83 Nethelands Belgium Luxemboug United Kingdom Ieland Denmak Geece Spain Potugal In the nothen membe states, the aea with no limitations usually deceases when iigation is applied (cf. Tables 22 and 23). A distinct dop occus in Belgium, Ieland and Denmak, i.e. 17%. 27% and 19% of the county aea espectively. The aea of sloping land (slopes between 8-15%) with no othe limitations is the main eason fo this dop. In the above-mentioned counties 25%, 20% and.28% of the aea is coveed with sloping land. This aea is only patly countebalanced by land fom which the soil wate deficit unde ainfed conditions is compensated by iigation. Although supplementay iigation is sometimes needed in the nothen membe states, the land suitability fo fuit poduction unde ainfed conditions is of moe elevance fo these counties. In contast to this, in the southen membe states infomation on the possible effect of iigation on land suitability is a essential. The net aea of land with no limitations fo fuit gowing in these counties was assessed not to incease substantially by applying iigation wate (Table 23). In some counties (e.g. Geece and Potugal) the net aea does not change. In fact it sometimes even deceases. This means that the incease in the aea with no soil wate deficit, due

75 to iigation, is not countebalanced by the aea with slopes between 8% &d 15, which was assumed to be a modeate limitation unde iigated conditions. The total aea of land with no o modeate estictions fo iigated fuit tee cultivation, howeve, inceases in all southen membe states by 6% up to 19%. Hence, the aea of unsuitable land deceases by the same amount. In Potugal, the aea with unsuitable land deceases by 19%, but still amounts to 77%. Land located on slopes that ae too steep (61% of the county aea) and land with a poo soil-physical quality (about 48%) ae the main easons. In Spain, unsuitable land fo iigated fuit: gowing deceases by 15% compaed with ainfed conditions. So, about 75% of Spain is still unsuitable. Again, the modeately steep and steep slopes and the soil-physical quality ae the pincipal easons (about 50% and 45% of the Spanish aea, espectively). In Geece and Italy, the decease in unsuitable land by applying iigation wate is less (6% and 7%) than at the Ibeian Peninsula. The still high pecentages of unsuitable land in Geece and Italy (89% and 83%) even unde iigated conditions ae caused by the slopes and the soil-physical quality. In the Mediteanean counties, the NUTS-1 egions Sud-Ouest and Mediteanee (F), Nod-Est and Emilia-Romagna (It) and Madid (Sp) have a well suitable aea fo iigated fuit tee cultivation of moe than 10% (Appendix 12 and Map 8). In the egions Madid and Emilia-Romagna, the aea with no limitations is even highe than 15%. High pecentages of unsuitable land fo iigated fuit gowing (moe than 90% of NUTS-1 aea) occu in Nod-Ovest, Lazio and Sadegna (It) and in Cental Ellas and East and South Ellas (G) (Appendix 12). In Italy, the main easons fo these high pecentages ae a poo soil-physical quality (80% up to 91% of NUTS-1 aea) and modeately steep and steep slopes (56% up to 71% of NUTS-1 aea). In Geece, both the poo soil-physical quality and the steep slopes ae equally impotant (76% up to 85%). When iigation is applied a elatively high decease in the aea of unsuitable land fo fuit gowing (moe than 15% of NUTS-1 egion) occus in Mediteanee (F), Sud and Sicilia (I), Madid, Cento and Su (Sp), Note do Continente and Sud do Continente (P) (cf. Appendices 10 and 12). An incease of 5% o moe of the NUTS- 1 egion with no limitations can be found in Mediteanee (F), Cento and Campania (It) because of applying iigation. It should be noted that the pecentage of suitable land fo fuit tee cultivation could be highe as mentioned above if imgated and ainfed poduction wee mutually consideed in a egion. Then, land with a soil wate deficit unde ainfed conditions could be iigated and shift fom land with sevee o modeate limitations to land with no limitations, wheeas land located on slopes of between 8% and 15% with no limitations unde ainfed conditions emains well suitable as long as the highe equiements fo iigation ae not consideed. Only a mutual evaluation of land fo both ainfed and iigated conditions could answe the question of how much land is actually suitable when iigation is optional. Such an evaluation was beyond the scope of ou study. Fuit yield A detailed chaacteization of the suitability classes within the diffeent NUTS-1 egions in tems of inputs and outputs was beyond the scope of this study. Some

76 easily available infomation on outputs, i.e. yield data, ae povided. Fuit poduction data ae only elevant if a paticula fuit species is consideed because the poduction substantially diffes among the species of the boad goup of fuit tees consideed. ADD^^ poduction in the nothen membe states depends, of couse, on soil and weathe. Howeve, cultiva, planting density and puning also have a pofound effect on the fuit yield. Wagenmakes (1985; 1988) epots highest yields fo the apple cultiva 'Rode Boskoop' of about 82 tonnesha on a well suitable soil in the Nethelands. In an eight-yea expeiment the wost teatment (e-g. a low planting density) poduced about 20% less than the best teatment (e.g. a high planting density). In the context of an intenational expeiment on high planting densities, apple fuit yields of 118 tonnesha (cv. 'Golden Delicious') and 88 tonnestha (cv. 'Gloste') wee attained on well suitable soils in the Nethelands (Wagenmakes, 1988). These figues should be educed by about 10%' because no field taffic lanes wee pesent in the expeiment. The yield diffeences between the wost and best teatment duing a fou-yea peiod wee about 30% and 20% fo the cultivas 'Golden Delicious' and 'Gloste'. Investigations with the apple cultiva 'Elsta' evealed highest fuit yields of 55 tonnesha in the Nethelands and 61 tonnesha in Denmak (Wagenmakes, 1985). Again planting systems, especially the density, appeaed to have a ponounced effect. Apple yield diffeences of about 30% may occu. Wagenmakes (1986; 1988) also povides data.on the yield of peas on well suitable soils in the Nethelands. The highest yields wee obtained duing a long-tem expeiment and amounted to about 56 tonnesha (cv. 'Confeence') and 53 tonnesha (cv. 'Doyenne'). Yield diffeences between the wost and best teatments on the same location wee compaable to those of apples. Standad figues fo apple and pea poduction on suitable Dutch soils ae povided by Joosse (1990). These figues ae used fo economic analysis. Poduction depends on the age of the fuit tees, planting density and cultiva. Standad poduction figues fo a full-gown fuit cop ae given in Table 24. The fuit yields on the expeimental fields, as epoted by Wagenmakes, ae twice as high as the standad figues. When the highest planting density is consideed, the best yielding apple cultiva ('Gloste') poduces about 30% moe than the wost (cv. 'Cox's Oange Pippin'). Vaiation in planting density of apple cause yield diffeences of 10% to 25%. The standad poduction figues fo peas ae also significantly lowe than the yields attained fom the expeimental fields, i.e. 30% to 50%. The highest yielding cultiva ('Confeence') poduces about 40% moe than the lowest yielding (cv. 'Doyenne de Conice'), when a planting density of 2500 tee pe hectae is consideed. Planting density usually causes yield diffeences of 10% to 20%. Howeve, the cultiva 'Giese Wildeman' shows a moe substantial vaiation, i.e. about 40%.

77 Table 24 Standadfiguesfo apple and pea poduction on suitable Dutch soils (deived fom Joosse, 1990) cultiva age planting density yield yeas numbe of teedha tonnedhdyea apple Golden Delicious Cox's Oange Pippin Schone van Boskoop James Gieve Winston Benoni Jonagold Kamijn de Sonnaville Elsta Gloste pea Confeence Doyenne du Comice Beue Hady Legipont Bonne Louise d'avanches Tomphe de Vienne Saint Remy Giesse Wildeman Pecose de Tevoux The yield of & also depends on cultiva, planting system and puning. Fo instance, in a Dutch expeiment, the highest yield of the cultiva 'Victoia' amounted to about 10 tonneslha, wheeas the cultivas 'Opal' and 'Reine Claude d'oullins' did not exceed appoximately 8 and 7 tonneslha, espectively (Wagenmakes, 1987; 1988). In the Mediteanean counties, fuit cops with highe heat equiements can be cultivated. De la Rosa and Moeia (1987) analysed the yield of peaches in Andalucia

78 (Sp). The yield of peaches in this egion vaied fom 6 to 12 tonnesha. An aveage yield of about 10 tonneslha was attained. Competitive suitable land fo fuit tees and othe cop types An estimate was made of the aea of land of a NUTS-1 egions which is suitable fo both fuit tees and othe types of cops (e.g. intensively managed gass, ceeals and oot cops). Futhemoe, the aea was assessed which is only suitable fo fuit tees and not fo the othe type of cops. The common aea of unsuitable land was also estimated, i.e. the aea which is expected to be of no use fo eithe fuit tees o othe type of cops. The estimation pocedue used is explained in Chapte 4. The basic assumption is that suitable land is nested at least at the level of a land evaluation unit, as illustated in Figue 8A. The esults fo a land evaluation unit, such as the aea only suitable fo fuit tees o the aea suitable fo both fuit tees and oot cops, ae aggegated at the NUTS-1 level (detemination of weighted aveages of land with a paticula suitability using the aea of each of the land evaluation units and thei suitabilities). In Appendix 11 estimated competitive land, common unsuitable land fo fuit tees and some othe cop types ae pesented fo ainfed conditions fo the NUTS-1 egions. These esults ae expessed as a pecentage of the aea of a NUTS-1 egion. In Appendix 11 the pecentage of land only suitable fo ainfed fuit tee cultivation is also given fo those cases when the fuit tees have to compete with gass, ceeals o oot cops. Finally, the pecentage of land of a NUTS- 1 egion is pesented which is unsuitable fo poducing fuit unde ainfed conditions, but which is suitable fo gowing gass, ceeals.o oot cops. In Appendix 13 the same esults ae given fo iigated fuit -tee cultivation. Unde ainfed conditions high pecentages of the NUTS-1 egion with competitive land (>SO% of NUTS-1 egion) occu in Nod-Pas-de-Calais and Ouest in Fance (Appendix 11). So, this means that many land units ae suitable fo both fuit tee gowing and othe cop types, such as intensively used gassland, ceeals and oot cops. Relatively high pecentages of land only suitable fo ainfed fuit poduction can be found in Saaland (34%) and Region Wallone (57%). These egions have vast aeas with slopes of between 15% and 25%, which ae assumed to be suitable fo ainfed fuit gowing but not fo aable faming o intensively used gasslands. Regions with hadly any competitive land o land suitable fo fuit tee cultivation, but with significant pecentages of land suitable fo aable faming occu in the Mediteanean counties (e.g. 17% to 30% in Sicilia in Italy dependent on the cop type). Suitable fo aable cops actually means potentially suitable. The aable cop gown on this land may suffe wate stess, which is finally evaluated by model simulation (Reinds and Van Lanen, in pep.; De Koning et al., in pep.). In the Mediteanean counties also high pecentages of land occu which is unsuitable fo both ainfed fuits tee and othe cop types. In the Mediteanean counties, the pecentage of competitive land inceases when iigation is applied (e.g. in Sicilia by 17% fom 1% to 18% of the NUTS-1 egion; cf. Appendices 11 and 13). In these counties, the aea of suitable land fo iigated fuit poduction is only elatively small. This means that iigated fuit tee cultivation and aable faming must compete on the same good soils. In some egions, an exception needs to be made fo competition between iigated fuit and oot cops

79 (e.g. in Spain and Nod-Est in Italy). In these egions, significant pecentages of land (1 1% up to 19% of the NUTS-1 egion) still occu which ae suitable' fo iigated fuit poduction and which ae unsuitable fo oot cops. The high stone content of the soils in these egions is the eason fo this. The assessment of competitive and unsuitable land was based on the assumption that suitable land is nested (Fig. 8A) as mentioned above. Usually this assumption is coect. Howeve, in the case of fuit tee cultivation occasionally non-nested suitable land may occu (Fig. 8B). Non-nested suitable land esults in an oveestimation of the pecentage of competitive land and an undeestimation of land which is expected to be only suitable fo one of the cops consideed. Non-nested suitable land exists if pat of a compound land evaluation unit is suitable fo a paticula cop and unsuitable fo anothe cop, wheeas on anothe pat of the land evaluation unit the opposite pevails. Fo instance, the pecentage of suitable land of a land evaluation unit fo ainfed fuit tee cultivation may be highe because modeately steep slopes (15%-25%) ae still assumed to be suitable fo fuit poduction wheeas they ae unsuitable fo intensively managed gass, ceeals o oot cops. On the othe hand, the pecentage may be smalle because land with sevee dought estictions was evaluated as unsuitable fo ainfed fuit poduction, although it is still assessed as potentially suitable fo gass, ceeals and oot cops. So, non-nested suitable land unde ainfed conditions may occu when a compound land evaluation unit (LEU) has subunits with slopes less than 15% and subunits with slopes between 15% and 25%. The land evaluation unit must be compised of subunits with sevee dought estictions and subunits with no o modeate estictions (Fig. 9). In the hypothetical situation given in Figue 9, 50% of the LEU is suitable fo both ainfed fuit cultivation and fo gass, ceeals and oot cops. 25% of the LEU consists of competitive land (subunit 2), 25% is only suitable fo ainfed fuit gowing, 25% is only potentially suitable fo gass, ceeals and oot cops and anothe 25% is unsuitable fo all consideed cops. The analysis applied, howeve, only consides nested suitable land. This means that the analysis in this case incoectly pedicts 50% of competitive land and anothe 50% as unsuitable. Fotunately, the combinations of chaacteistics, as pesented in Figue 9, ae not likely to occu fequently. An estimate of the possible eo caused by non-nested land cannot eadily be povided, because soil wate stess poblems can be caused by a combination of seveal chaacteistics (see Table 21). The highe soil textue equiements fo oot cops than fo ceeals and intensively managed gass (Reinds and Van Lanen, in pep.) might be anothe souce fo diffeent pecentages of non-nested land. Land with a fine soil textue (clay content between 35% and 60%) was assumed to be unsuitable fo both fuit poduction and fo the cultivation of oot cops, wheeas it was evaluated as potentially suitable fo ceeal and gass gowing. So, when ainfed fuit poduction is compaed with ceeal o gass gowing, non-nested suitable land occus if a compound land evaluation unit contains subunits with a fine soil textue and subunits with coase textues. The land evaluation unit must also be compised of subunits with sevee dought estictions and subunits with no o modeate dought estictions fo ainfed fuit poduction. Again this combination of chaacteistics is not likely to occu egulaly.

80 slope = < 15 % slope = 15-25% \ swd = high swd = high slope=< 15 % I slope = 15-25% swd = low swd = hiah swd = soil wate deficit (only elevant fo fuit) I: unsuitable land fo ainfed fuit gass, ceeals and oot cops II: unsuitable land fo ainfed fuit and suitable fo gass, ceeals and oot cops Ill: suitable land fo ainfed fuit gass, ceeals and oot cops IV suitable land fo ainfed fuit and unsuitable fo gass, ceeals and oot cops Fig. 9 Example of a compound land evaluation unit with non-nested suitable land As each cop type has its own equiements (Reinds and Van Lanen, in pep.), the pecentage of non-nested land depends on the cop types and management systems compaed. Fo instance, fo iigated fuit poduction the pecentage of non-nested land will be smalle than fo ainfed fuit cultivation. Iigated fuit poduction imposes the same slope equiements as intensively managed gassland, ceeals and oot cops. Moeove, dought poblems ae assumed not to occu (iigated fuit) o ae analysed duing a subsequent stage of the investigations (gass, ceeals and oot cops).

81 5.3 Rainfed and iigated citus Citus fuits include among othes, oanges, lemons, clementines, mandains and gapefuit. In the EC oanges cove moe than half of the citus aea. Lemons ae the second cop among the citus fuits in the EC. Lemons ae cultivated on about 20% of the citus aea. Citus mainly occus in Spain, Italy, Geece and Potugal. A small aea also occus in southen Fance (Euostat, 1988). The elatively high heat equiements estict the cultivation of citus to these egions. In this section the suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of citus fuits is pesented. We assume that the geneal soil and climatic equiements, as aleady discussed fo ainfed o iigated fuit tees, also apply to citus. So, modeate o sevee limitations fo the cultivation of the boad goup of fuit tees (Section 5.2) also hold fo the moe specific goup of citus fuits. In addition to these geneal equiements, the highe heat equiements of the citus cop wee taken into account. Afte explaining of the additional, specific climatic and soil equiements fo citus fuits, the pecentages of well suitable, modeately suitable and unsuitable land fo each NUTS-1 egion is given. Finally, some esults ae pesented on how fa suitable land fo citus coincides with suitable land fo intensively managed gass, ceeals and oot cops Evaluation citeia Fo citus fuits, essentially the same climatic and soil equiements ae used as fo the boad goup of fuit tees. These equiements ae summaized in Table 21. Additionally, a few othe equiements ae intoduced which ae moe specific fo citus fuits, fo example the tempeatue egime. When evaluating EC land fo the potential of citus gowing, the equiements of oanges wee mainly consideed, if the vaious citus fuits have diffeent demands. The evaluation citeia fo the cultivation of citus fuits wee subdivided into climatic and soil equiements. Two diffeent management situations wee defined, i.e. a ainfed situation and a situation with iigation. In both situations a pope management was assumed (e.g. puning, application of nutients and pesticides etc.). Climatic equiements Citus fuits have high wate demands, hence they ae less dought toleant (e.g. Hackett and Caolane, 1982). De la Rosa and Moeia (1987) epoted a wate demand of about 800 mm. Hackett and Caolane (1982) mentioned an annual ainfall of between mm needed to gow Mediteanean mandain (Citus deliciosa Ten.). The dought susceptibility of EC land to gow citus fuits was evaluated as fo the boad goup of fuit tees. The mean annual potential pecipitation deficit (potential evapotanspiation minus pecipitation) was used as an impotant climatic chaacteistic (see Section 5.2.1). In aeas with a high potential pecipitation deficit, land is only suitable fo citus gowing when the available amount of soil moistue is high. So, assessment of the dought susceptibility was done by simultaneously evaluating climatic and soil chaacteistics.

82 Citus fuits belong to the goup of subtopical fuit. The heat equiements ae elatively high and no paticula chilling demands ae needed. The demands ae substantially highe than fo apples and peas, and somewhat highe than fo olives. Among the citus fuits small diffeences occu. Fo instance, lemon and mandain ae a little moe sensitive to fost than oange. Howeve, along the coasts, lemons advance moe in nothely diections than oanges. The elatively high heat equiements ae the dominant eason fo the absence of the citus in the nothen membe states. The citus cop needs sufficiently mild wintes. Howeve, the winte does not need to be entiely fost fee (Papadakis, 1970). The aveage minimum tempeatue of the coldest month should be above -2S C (Papadakis, 1975). Late fosts in sping o ealy fosts in autumn ae extemely hamful to the tees. Hackett and Caolane (1982) indicated a base tempeatue of 13OC fo sweet oanges (Citus sinensis L. Osb.). Below this tempeatue thee is hadly any gowth. De la Rosa and Moeia (1987) specified a minimum tempeatue of between 10 C and 12OC fo citus (Citus sp.). Hackett and Caolane (1982) also mentioned the most favouable tempeatue duing the gowing season, which should be between 20 C and 30 C fo sweet oange and between 22OC and 30 C fo Mediteanean mandain. Citus fuits ae able to esist high maximum tempeatues. Maximum tempeatues of between 38OC and 45OC ae pemissible (De la Rosa and Moeia, 1987). Only incidently might this type of damage occu in the EC. Because we ae woking with boad climatic data in ou study no land was evaluated as unsuitable fo this eason. Aeas with climatic conditions appopiate fo citus fuits must have at least a mean annual tempeatue as high as the lowe limit of olives, i.e. 13OC (Sys, 1985). Moeove, thee must be at least two months with a mean tempeatue in the favouable ange between 22OC and 30 C. Futhemoe, the climatically suitable land was subdivided into land with no estictions, and land with modeate estictions caused by low minimum tempeatues in the winte peiod. Modeate estictions wee assumed to occu when the mean minimum tempeatue in the peiod Octobe to Mach is below 6OC. This limit is deived fom an analysis of the monthly minimum tempeatues and the cuent geogaphic distibution of citus as pesented by Papadakis (1975). Soil equiements Citus fuits impose the same equiements on the soil as fuit tees in geneal (Table 21). As fo fuit tees the dought susceptibility fo citus was deived fom the potential pecipitation deficit and soil chaacteistics, such as soil dainage, soil textue, soil depth and the pesence of a soil phase (e.g. stony, gavelly phase). Futhemoe, soil salinity, alkalinity, soil-physical quality, CEC, soil dainage, slope and the pesence of gypsum wee evaluated as fo the boad goup of fuit tees. A distinct diffeence between the citus'and othe fuit tees is thei eaction to high amounts of CaC03 in the soil (Hackett and Caolane, 1982; De la Rosa and Moeia, 1987). Land with high contents of CaC03 in the soil was assumed to have modeate estictions fo citus gowing, instead of no estictions as assumed fo the othe fuit tees.

83 The additional equiements fo citus fuits ae summaized in Table 25. All the equiements mentioned fo fuit tees in geneal (Table 21) also apply to citus fuits. As fo fuit tees in geneal, the distinction between ainfed and iigated citus is the diffeent evaluation of the slope and the dought susceptibility. Unde iigated conditions no wate stess was assumed to occu and land located on slopes above 8% was assumed to epesent conditions with estictions. Table 25 Summay of additional climatic and soil equiements to evaluate EC land fo citus fuits equiement limitations - -- no modeate sevee mean annual tempeatue >13OC <13OC numbe of months mean tempeatue >2 between 22OC and 30 C mean minimum tempeatue in Oct-Mach CaCO, absent pesent Suitability fo ainfed and iigated citus, In this section, the suitability fo cultivating citus fuits in the Euopean Communities is explained. The suitability is pesented fo ainfed and iigated conditions. Some yield data ae also povided. Finally, some infomation is given on how fa suitable land fo the cultivation of citus fuits is competitive with othe types of land use. Suitability fo citus cultivation The suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of citus fuits was quantitatively analysed using ALES. Fo each of the appoximately 2800 land evaluation units (unique combination of soil and climate) the pecentage of the aea having no, modeate o sevee limitations was detemined. As the land use equiements diffe fom ainfed and iigated conditions, the evaluation was caied out sepaately. Suitability was detemined by using the so-called maximum limitation method (e.g. Sys, 1985; Rossite, 1990). So, the maximum limitation of a single climatic o soil popety of a land evaluation unit detemines the suitability, iespective of all the othe climatic and soil popeties. The esults obtained by applying ALES to the land evaluation units ae too detailed fo futhe pocessing by the Dutch Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy in the subsequent poject phase. Hence, the esults wee aggegated to obtain weighted aveage figues fo the EC administative egions at NUTS-1 level. In Appendices 14 and 16 the suitability is pesented fo ainfed and

84 iigated conditions, espectively. Maps 9 and 10 give the pecentage of land fo each NUTS-1 egion, which has no o modeate limitations fo citus fuits. Land with no o modeate limitations is futhe indicated as suitable. Suitability fo ainfed citus Less than 2% of EC land was evaluated to be suitable fo gowing citus fuits unde ainfed conditions. The specific heat equiements combined with the low dought toleance ae the main easons fo this low pecentage. Only about 1% of EC land is unsuitable because of othe easons (e.g. wetness, topogaphy only). Suitable land fo ainfed citus fuits only occus in the Mediteanean counties (incl. southen Fance). The pecentage of unsuitable land, howeve, is still extemely high in these counties (Table 26). This pecentage of unsuitable land vaies fom 95% to 98%. In Italy 46% of the land was assessed to be unsuitable because of an inadequate tempeatue egime, and on 90% of the emaining potentially favouable land a sevee soil wate stess would occu if ainfed citus wee to be cultivated. Modeate limitations occu on 1.9% of Italian land, and ae caused by a modeate wate stess and/o low minimum tempeatues duing the winte. In Geece, hadly any land was evaluated with no estictions fo ainfed citus. The modeately suitable land (5.3% of the Geek aea) has some poblems with a high CaC03 content in the soils and/o low minimum tempeatues duing the peiod Octobe to Mach. The pincipal eason fo Geek land to be evaluated as unsuitable is the occuence of sevee wate stess when citus is gown (about 95% of the unsuitable aea). In Spain, 2% of the land has no estictions unde ainfed conditions. On 1.8% of the land modeate constaints occu, which ae caused by low winte minimum tempeatues. About 38% of Spanish land has sevee climatological limitations fo gowing citus fuits and on 94% of the emaining land sevee dought poblems would be encounteed unde ainfed conditions. In Potugal 2.6% of the land has no estictions fo gowing ainfed citus fuits. On about 97% of the Potuguese land sevee estictions occu. Climatic limitations occu in 40% of Potugal and on the emaining land (about 94%) a high dought susceptibility would occu. Table 26 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no o slight limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limifations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo ainfed citus fuits; (100% unsuitable land occus in the non-mentioned counties) County limitations - - no o slight modeate sevee Fance Italy Geece Spain Potugal The dominant soils in southen Fance and the Mediteanean counties, which have no estictions, ae medium textued, goundwate affected soils which ae still adequately dained and located in a level landscape. The soils ae classified as Gleyo- Eutic and Dystic Fluvisols. In Potugal Albo-Gleyic Luvisols wee also included.

85 Map 9 shows the pecentage of the NUTS-1 egions with no o modeate limitations fo gowing citus unde ainfed conditions. The pecentage of land of the NUTS-1 egions having no, modeate and sevee limitations ae pesented in Appendix 14. The nothen limit fo citus cultivation follows a line fom nothen Potugal, though nothen Spain, southen Fance and nothen Italy. The limit is located noth of Geece, although in some nothen Geek locations damage is epoted because of low tempeatues (Lionakis, 1989). Moeove, the noth-south located mountain chain in Italy, the Apennines, was assumed to be unsuitable because of climatic estictions. Most NUTS-1 egions have a small pecentage of land (0-5%) which was assessed to be suitable (no o modeate limitations). Exceptions ae the Sud do Continente (P), Madid and Este (Sp), Cento (It) and Noth-Ellas (G.). In these egions elatively moe of the above-mentioned soils occu. In the southen EC egions with an adequate tempeatue egime fo citus copping, the aea of suitable land (no and modeate limitations) fo ainfed citus is simila to that of fuit tee cultivations (cf. Appendices 14 and 10). Fo instance, the Geek NUTS-1 egions, Su in Spain, Sud do Continente in Potugal and Cento in Italy have the same suitable aea fo both land uses. In these NUTS-1 egions diffeences only occu between the aea with no o modeate estictions fo ainfed citus and ainfed fuit tee cultivation. The pesence of CaC03 was assumed to be a modeate limitation fo citus cops and not fo the boad goup of fuit tees (cf. Tables 25 and 21). So, fo ainfed citus gowing the aea with modeate limitations was evaluated to be lage than fo fuit tee cultivation, which is clealy indicated by the figues fo Geece and fo Su in Spain. Suitability fo iigated citus Iigation of citus fuits is a well-known pactice in the climatologically elevant egions of the EC. The land suitability to gow citus may change when iigation is applied. We assumed that dought susceptibility was no longe elevant. So, potentially moe land might be suitable. Howeve, applying iigation imposes moe sevee equiements on the steepness of the slope. The same equiements wee used as fo fuit tees in geneal (Table 21). Slopes between 8-15% wee assumed to epesent modeate limitations instead of no limitations unde ainfed conditions and land with slopes of between 1525% was evaluated as unsuitable unde iigated conditions, wheeas it was still modeately suited unde ainfed conditions. All EC land was evaluated again using these new citeia. The aea with an inadequate tempeatue egime (70% of EC) does not change, of couse. So, about 30% of the EC emains potentially favouable fo iigated citus fuits. If dought susceptibility wee the only limiting land quality, all this land would be suitable if iigation is applied. Othe limiting factos, howeve, occu. The suitable land fo gowing citus in the EC was assessed to incease fom less than 2% to slightly moe than 6% when iigation is applied. This means that only about 20% of the potentially suitable land is actually suitable. The dominant easons fo this land to be evaluated as unsuitable, although thee ae no tempeatue and dought constaints, ae the soil-physical quality (shallow and/o fine textued soils) and the slope. On 63% of the climatologically potentially favouable land fo iigated citus sevee soil-physical limitations occu, and on 57% of the land sevee slope poblems. Some land has both estictions, fo example shallow soils on a steep slope.

86 Table 27 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suiable (no o slight limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo iigated citus fuits; (100% unsuitable land occus in the non-mentioned counties) County Fance Italy Geece Spain Potugal limitations no o slight modeate sevee In the Mediteanean counties, the pecentage of suitable land (no o modeate limitations) vaies fom 9% to 15% when iigation is applied (Table 27). The aea of suitable land inceases by a facto of 2 to 5 as a esult of iigation. In Italy, 1.4% of the land was evaluated to have no estictions, and 7.2% has modeate estictions. A numbe of land chaacteistics cause these modeate limitations, such as a low winte minimum tempeatue, pesence of CaC03, slopes of between 8% and 15%. In aeas with an appopiate tempeatue egime (54% of Italian land), a poo soilphysical quality and steep slopes ae the dominant easons fo land to be evaluated as unsuitable. About 70% of the climatologically potentially favouable Italian land has a poo soil-physical quality, and 48% of the land has slopes that ae too steep. In Geece thee would be no suitable land fo citus even if iigation is applied. This is unlikely; the small-scale soil map used in this study, could be a eason fo this questionable esult. About 11% of Geece is coveed by land with modeate estictions. Just as in Italy, seveal of land chaacteistics cause these modeate estictions. On 71% of Geek land, the poo soil-physical quality pevents the cultivation of citus and on 73% of the land slopes pohibit citus cultivation. About 16% of Spanish land was assessed to be suitable fo iigated citus fuits (no o modeate limitations). As in the othe Mediteanean counties, the shallowness o fine textue of the soils peclude the cultivation of citus. In Potugal, abo,ut 13% of the land is suitable fo iigated citus cultivation. In those Potuguese egions with an adequate tempeatue egime, about 62% of the aea is unsuitable because of sevee soil-physical poblems and 56% of the land has sevee slope dawbacks. The dominant soils with no estictions fo iigated citus copping ae medium textued (medium and medium fine) and have slopes of less than 8%. In Fance, the Gleyo-Eutic Fluvisols and Chomic Luvisols pedominantly belong to this goup. In Italy, some of the Eutic Cambisols and Gleyo-Eutic Fluvisols have no estictions. In Spain, moe than 95% of the aea with no limitations is coveed by Gleyo-Eutic Fluvisols. The dominant Potuguese soils ae Gleyo-Eutic Fluvisols and Chomic Canbisols which cove moe than 80% of the land with no dawbacks. Map 10 shows the pecentage of the NUTS-1 egions with no o modeate limitations fo gowing citus unde iigated conditions. The pecentage of land of the NUTS-1 egions with no, modeate and sevee limitations ae pesented in Appendix 16. The nothen climatic limit, peviously explained fo ainfed conditions, does not, of

87 couse, shift by applying iigation. In many NUTS-1 egions with an adequate tempeatue egime, the aea with no o modeate dawbacks substantially inceases when iigation is assumed to be applied. An incease of moe than 10% occus in the NUTS-1 egions Mediteanee in Fance, Sud and Sicilia in Italy, Noeste, Madid, Cento, Este and Su in Spain, and Sud do Continente in Potugal. Especially the aea with modeate estiction inceases. The aea with no limitations inceases by no moe than 5% in all NUTS-1 egions. In Sud do Continente (P) the aea with no limitations is, unde ainfall conditions (5%), even highe than unde iigated conditions (3%). As peviously explained fo the ainfed conditions, the suitable aea (no o modeate limitations) fo iigated citus gowing is simila to that of iigated fuit tee cultivation (cf. Appendices 16 and 12). Because of the pesence of CaC03 the aea with modeate estictions fo iigated citus gowing was evaluated to be, howeve, lage than fo iigated fuit tee cultivation. Fo instance, in the Geek NUTS-1 egions the aea with modeate estictions fo iigated citus cultivation was assessed to be 1% to 7% lage than fo iigated fuit tees. Citus yield A detailed chaacteization of the suitability classes within the diffeent NUTS-1 egions in tems of inputs and outputs was beyond the scope of this study. Some easily available data on the outputs expessed as yield, ae povided. Citus poduction should be expessed fo each paticula citus species, because ponounced diffeences pevail in the fuit poduction capacity. The citus poduction in Andalucia anges fom 7.5 to 25.2 tonsha fo oanges and 9.7 to 13.0 tonsha fo lemons.(de la Rosa and Moeia, 1987). Substantially highe yields ae attained on Cypus. Thee, the yield of Valencia oanges can each 60 tonsha on well suitable soils unde iigated conditions (Ophanos et al, 1986). Gapefuit tees can poduce even moe, fo exemple 70 tonsha, unde well wateed conditions (Van de Weet et al., 1973). Hackett and Caolane (1982) epoted a typical sweet oange yield of 30 tonsfha, and a yield ange fo Mediteanean mandain and satsuma mandain of 4-10 tonsha and tonsha, espectively. Competitive suitable land fo citus fuit and othe cop types An estimate was made fo the aeas of land of NUTS-1 egions which ae suitable fo both citus fuit and fo othe types of cops (e.g. intensively managed gass, ceeals and oot cops). Futhemoe, the aea was assessed which is only suitable fo citus o one of the othe type of cops consideed. The common aea of unsuitable land was estimated. The estimation pocedue used is explained in Chapte 4. The basic assumption is that suitable land is nested, at least at the level of a land evaluation unit, as illustated in Figue 8A. The esults fo a land evaluation unit wee aggegated (detemination of weighted aveages of the suitability classes using the aea of each of the land evaluation units and thei suitabilities) and pesented fo the NUTS-1 egions. In Appendix 15 estimated competitive land, common unsuitable land fo citus fuit and some othe cop types ae pesented fo ainfed conditions. These esults ae expessed as a pecentage of the aea of a NUTS-1 egion. In Appendix 15 also the pecentage of emaining suitable land fo ainfed citus cultivation is also given if the citus fuits have to compete with gass, ceeals o

88 oot cops. Finally, the pecentage of land of a NUTS-1 egion is pesented which is unsuitable fo poducing citus unde ainfed conditions, but which is suitable fo gass, ceeals o oot cops. In Appendix 17 the same esults ae given fo iigated citus cultivation. Unde ainfed conditions no high pecentages of the NUTS-1 egion with competitive land (>25% of NUTS-1 egion) occu (Appendix 15). The NUTS-1 egion Madid has the highest pecentage with 16% land which is suitable fo ainfed citus gowing as well as fo cop types such as intensively gown gass, ceeals and oot cops. Land suitable only fo ainfed citus cultivation and not fo the othe cop types consideed can hadly be found in the EC. The NUTS-1 egion Cento (It) has the highest pecentage of land only suitable fo ainfed citus, i.e. 3% of the aea. Most NUTS-1 egions have substantial aeas which ae unsuitable fo ainfed citus (Appendix 14); these egions ae eithe only suitable fo the othe cop types consideed o ae even unsuitable fo these activities. Unde iigated conditions the pecentages of competitive land incease (Appendix 17). A pecentage of moe than 10% competitive land can be found in ten out of nineteen NUTS-1 egions which ae climatologically suitable. The NUTS-1 egion Madid has again the highest pecentage, i.e. 43%, 43%, and 32% when iigated citus has to compete with intensively gown gass, ceeals, and oot cops, espectively. Pecentages of 5% o moe of the NUTS-1 egions which ae only suitable fo iigated citus and not fo all the othe cop types egaded wee assessed to occu in Sud (It) and Ellas Noth (G). A emakable pecentage of land (>lo% of the NUTS-1 egion) only suitable fo iigated citus and not fo oot cops can be found in the Spanish egions Madid, Este and Su. The pesence of stony soils which wee assumed to be unsuitable fo oot cops cause this elatively highe pecentage. Simila to the ainfed situation most NUTS-1 egions have substantial aeas which ae unsuitable fo iigated citus (Appendix 16); these egions ae eithe only suitable fo the othe cop types consideed o ae even unsuitable fo these activities. The estimation of the figues in Appendices 15 and 17 was based on the assumption that suitable land is nested, at least at the level of the land evaluation unit, as explained in Chapte 4. This assumption does not apply to a mino numbe of units. Examples, which also hold fo citus, ae given in Section Olives The main olive poducing counties in the wold ae Algeia, Geece, Italy, Moocco, Spain, Syia, Tunisia, Agentina and Bazil. In this section the suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of olives is pesented. The equiements and evaluation citeia ae discussed fist. Then, the pecentages of well suitable, modeately suitable and unsuitable land fo each NUTS-1 egion ae given. Finally, some esults ae pesented on how fa suitable land fo olive gowing coincides with suitable land fo gass, ceeals and oot cops.

89 5.4.1 Evaluation citeia Olive cultivation is geneally not consideed as an economically attactive activity in the Mediteanean counties. Olive tees ae often planted in maginal aeas, whee no othe agicultual altenatives pevail. Sometimes they ae used as onamental tees. The olive tee easily ecoves fom dought stess. The olive tee does not need much cae, but biennial beaing is a common featue then. Howeve, by caefully selecting plant mateial and site, and by applying pope management techniques, olive tees can poduce enough to compete with othe fuit tees. The evaluation citeia fo the cultivation of olives wee subdivided into climatic equiements and soil equiements. The soil equiements ae futhe subdivided into citeia fo low and high management conditions. In both management situations no iigation wate was assumed to be applied. So, EC land was evaluated fo a ainfed olive cop. Futhemoe, some minimum inputs wee assumed to be applied (e.g. some puning, application of some animal manue). Climatic equiements The olive is a subtopical fuit tee o shub. The nothen membe states of the Euopean Communities ae too cold to gow olives (e.g. Papadakis, 1960; 1970; Hackett and Caolane, 1982). The favouable tempeatue ange fo olive gowing is between ls C and 34OC (Hackett and Caolane, 1982). Sys (1985) epoted that suitable land fo olives equies a mean annual tempeatue of above 13OC. This citeia was used in ou evaluation. Fuit poductivity of the olive may be advesely affected by extemely high tempeatues in the peiod befoe and duing bloom. Tempeatues above appoximately 38OC in Apil o May ae citical (Denney and McEachen, 1982). Only incidentally does this type of damage occu in the EC. Because we woked with boad climatic data in ou study no land was evaluated as unsuitable fo this eason. The olive cop equies a cool season. Olives flowe ealie and bette when they ae exposed to low tempeatues each winte. Hence, the cop cannot be gown in continuously wam climates. The southen bounday of wheat in the nothen hemisphee geneally coincides with the southen bounday of olives (Papadakis, 1970). This bounday, howeve, is located south of the Euopean Communities. The chilling equiements of olives ae compaable to those of gapes. But olives ae less esistant to winte coldness than gapes. Fo the venalization pocess, the minimum tempeatue may not exceed 8OC ove a specific peiode of time (Papadakis, 1975). Denney and McEachen (1985) defined days of venalization fo the olive cop as days on which the minimum tempeatue is between O C and 12S C. De la Rosa and Moeia (1987) mentioned minimum tempeatues equied of 8OC to 10 C, and Sys (1985) indicated a minimum tempeatue of 6OC. In ou evaluation, we assumed that suitable land fo olive cultivation has an aveage minimum tempeatue of the coldest month below 10 C. The olive may be damaged by extemely low tempeatues. Thee ae seveal factos which may detemine whethe o not a paticula tee will sustain damage at a specific minimum tempeatue. Nevetheless, expeiments and obsevations fom a vaiety

90 of olive poducing sites show that the olive will not suvive tempeatues below -12OC (Denney and McEachen, 1985). Abdullaev (1985; cited by Denney and McEachem, 1985) povided a citical tempeatue ange fom -8OC to -lo C, which leads to slight damage. Imenson et al. (1 987) epoted that the olive will be hamed by a tempeatue below -12OC. In his analysis of agicultual potential of wold climates, Papadakis (1970) stated that the aveage minimum tempeatue of the coldest month must be highe than -7OC. Sys (1985) and Abdel-Razik et al. (1987) indicated that olives can be exposed to an aveage minimum tempeatue in the colde months of highe than - 8OC, without showing fost damage. In ou evaluation we assumed that unsuitable land fo olive cultivation has an aveage minimum tempeatue of below -8OC. The olive cop is vey esistant to dought (e.g. Papadakis, 1975; Hackett and Caolane, 1982; Abdel-Razik et al., 1987). In dyland conditions, howeve, the cops suvives but the yields ae vey low. De la Rosa and Moeia (1987) epoted that a good olive cop needs 500 mm to 550 mm wate pe yea. Sys (1985) poposed to evaluate land fo olive gowing on, among othes, the basis of the annual ainfall. His data wee futhe elaboated fo ou analysis. Land with an annual ainfall of less than 150 mm was assumed to be unsuitable fo the cultivation of olives. In aeas with moe than 150 mm ain pe yea, the soil chaacteistics also detemine the suitability fo olive gowing. These ae explained in the following section which deals with soil chaacteistics. The olive tee equies a long ainless peiod, othewise phytosanitay poblems will aise (Papadakis, 1975). Aeas with a ainfall of moe than 1000 mm pe yea, o moe than 335 mm in the peiod fom Apil to Septembe wee evaluated as unsuitable. This limit was deived fom a boad analysis of the pevailing climatic data in the EC and should be consideed as a fist appoximation. In othe climatic egions in the wold, the limit must be futhe elaboated. In aeas with an annual ainfall of moe than 1400 mm, olives cannot be gown iespective of the summe ainfall (Sys, 1985). Sys (1985) epoted that in the nothen hemisphee the ainfall in August and Septembe must exceed 20 mm and 15 mm, espectively. The olive needs this ain.fo a good scleification of the.stone. In ou evaluation we also linked this citeia to available soil moistue. Theefoe, we evaluated land with coase o a vey fine textued soil as unsuitable if the ainfall is lowe than the above-mentioned amounts. Land with medium textued soils was assumed to have no poblems with a low ainfall in August o Septembe. Soil equiements When the annual ainfall is moe than 150 mm, dought susceptibility was futhe analysed by evaluating the annual ainfall in combination with soil textue. In dyland conditions, land with a coase textue o a vey fine soil textue, was consideed to have a lowe ability to stoe ain. Coase textued soils have a elatively low moistue etention capacity and vey fine textued soils lose consideable amounts of wate because of bypass flow (e.g. Bouma, 1989). Land with an annual ainfall of between 150 mm and 300 mm has modeate limitations fo olive-cultivation, unless the soil textue is coase o vey fine. Coase and vey fine textued soils still have sevee limitations in such dyland conditions. In aeas with an annual ainfall of between

91 300 mm and 400 mm, coase and vey fine textued soils wee evaluated as modeately suitable, wheeas all othe land was chaacteized as suitable if thee ae no othe estictions. Susceptibility to dought is futhe evaluated by analysing the soil-physical envionment. Peat soils wee assumed to have a soil-physical envionment which is unsuitable fo the cultivation of olives. Fo the othe mineal soils, soil depth o maximum ooting depth was used in combination with the pesence of a soil phase (e.g. stony, gavelly) as measues of evaluating the soilphysical envionment. Vey shallow soils (maximum ooting depth <lo cm) wee assumed to be unsuitable, and shallow soils (maximum ooting depth between 10 cm and 40 cm) wee expected to impose modeate limitations fo the cultivation of olives. The modeately deep soils (maximum ooting depth between 40 cm and 60 cm) also have modeate limitations, iespective of the pesence of a soil phase. Modeately deep, deep and vey deep soils (maximum ooting depth between 60 cm and 80 cm, 80 cm and 120 cm and >I20 cm, espectively) wee assumed to have no estictions, unless a soil phase occus. Land with modeately deep to vey deep soils and a soil phase (e.g. gavelly, concetionay) was assumed to have modeate limitations. Soil dainage; a poductive olive tee equies a well dained soil. Hence, all land with vey poo, poo o tempoaily poo dainage was consideed to be unsuitable. An impefectly dained soil was expected to have modeate limitations, and modeately well, well o excessively well dained soils have no limitations fo olive gowing. Salinity and alkalinity; the olive cop is modeately toleant to soluble salts in the soil. Howeve, with a sodium satuation of the absobtion complex of moe than 15%, land was believed to have modeate limitations. If the electical conductivity of a soil exceeds 4 mmholcm, the land was assumed to have sevee estictions fo olive cultivation. Futhemoe, land with a sodic phase o a saline phase has modeate o sevee estictions, espectively. Slope; the peviously mentioned evaluation citeia wee assumed to be independent of the management level. The following citeia depend on the management level. Fo instance, steep slopes ae less estictive in a faming system with animal taction o handwok than in a system with full mechanization. In contast to this, natual fetility is mainly elevant in systems with a low management level. In olive poducing systems with full mechanization, slopes steepe than 15% wee assumed to be modeately suitable and slopes steepe than 25% cannot be utilized. When animal taction o handwok dominates (low input system), slope steepness was no longe expected to be a sevee poblem. In such management conditions slopes steepe than 25% wee assumed to give modeate poblems. No estictions occu on land with slopes of less than 25%. Nutient etention capacity; in poduction systems with a high nutient input, the cation exchange capacity (CEC) is no longe a sevee poblem. Only in soils with a vey low CEC (4 meq/100 gam soil) wee modeate limitations wee assumed to pevail. The pesence of gypsum was expected to cause modeate estictions even in a high input system.

92 When hadly any fetilizes ae applied, which is chaacteistic of a low input system, the CEC was assumed to be moe elevant. Land with a vey low CEC ( 4 meq1100 gam soil) was consideed to be unsuitable. When the CEC is low (5-15 meq) modeate estictions wee expected to occu. Land with a CEC above 15 meq1100 gam soil was assumed to be well suitable. In a low input system, the pesence of gypsum cannot easily be coected, this land was theefoe evaluated as unsuitable fo olive gowing. The above-mentioned soil evaluation citeia wee deived fom Hackett and Caolane (1982), Sys (1985) and De la Rosa Ad Moeia (1987). The soil and climatic equiements ae summaized in Table 28. Table 28 Summay of climatic and soil equiements used to evaluate EC land fo olive gowing limitations equiement no modeate sevee mean annual tempeatue minimum tempeatue coldest month August ainfall Septembe ainfall mean annual ainfall soil depth >20 mm if textue <20 mm if textue is coase o vey is coase o vey fine No estictions fo othe soil textue classes >15 mm if textue <I5 mm if textue is coase o vey is coase o vey fine fine No estictions fo othe soil textue classes >400 mm o mm if tex- >300 mm if textue tue is coase o is medium, medium vey fine o fine of fine mm if textue is medium, medium fine o fine <13OC <-8OC >1O0C notelevant notelevant <I50 mm o 400 mm if soil textue is coase o vey fine o A000 mn if summe ainfall > 335mm o >I400 mm soil dainage modeately good, good and excessive impefect tempoaily poo, poo and vey poo paent mateial mineal soils not-elevant peat soils

93 limitations equiement no modeate sevee soil phases: -gavelly -stony -1ithic -concetionay -petocalcic -saline -sod ic -combinations of soil phases absent absent absent absent absent absent absent absent pesent pesent pesent pesent pesent not-elevant pesent pesent not-elevant not-elevant not-elevant not-elevant not-elevant pesent not-elevant not-elevant salinity alkalinity not-elevant ESP> 15% >4 mmholcm not-elevant slope -high input level -low input level >25 % not-elevant gy psum -high input level -low input level absent absent pesent not-elevant not-elevant pesent CEC -high input level -low input level >5 meq pe 100 gam soil a15 meq pe 100 gam soil c5 meq pe 100 gam soil 5-15 meq pe 100 gam soil not-elevant <5 meq pe 100 gam soil Suitability fo olives In this section, suitability fo the cultivation of olives in the Euopean Communities is explained. Some yield data ae also povided. Finally, some infomation is given on how fa suitable land fo olive cultivation is competitive with othe types of land use. Suitability fo olive cultivation in a low and a high input system The suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of olives was quantitatively analysed using ALES. Fo each of the appoximately 2800 land evaluation units (unique combination of soil and climate) the pecentage of the aea with no, modeate o sevee limitations was detemined. Suitability was assessed by using the so-called maximum limitation method (e.g. Sys, 1985; Rossite, 1990). This implies that the maximum limitation of a single climatic o soil popety of a land evaluation unit

94 detemines the suitability, iespective of all the othe climatic and soil popeties. This infomation was too detailed fo futhe pocessing by the Dutch Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy in the subsequent poject phase. Hence, the esults wee aggegated to obtain weighted aveage figues fo the EC administative egions at NUTS-1 level. In Appendices 18 and 20 the suitability is pesented fo a low and high management level, espectively. Maps 11 and 12 give the pecentage of land of each NUTS-1 egion, which has no limitations fo olive cultivation. When a low input system was assumed to be applied about 25% of EC land was evaluated to be suitable, i.e. land with no o modeate estictions. About 6% of EC land has no limitations. When a high input system was assumed to be used the suitable aea slightly deceases by 3% to 22% of EC land. The aea with no limitations deceases fom 6% to 5%. Climatic conditions in the EC detemine that suitable land fo olive cultivation can only be found in southen Fance, Potugal, Spain, Italy and Geece (Tables 29 and 30). Moe than 90% of the Fench aea was evaluated to be unsuitable fo olive cultivation because of climatic easons. In Italy, Spain and Potugal sevee climatic estictions pevail on 46%, 38% and 29% of the aea, espectively. In this boad analysis, no land with sevee climatic limitations was assessed to occu in Geece. Geek land with modeate climatic estictions does, howeve, pevails. Table 29 Aea of land (9% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo cultivation; low input system County limitations no modeate sevee Fance Italy Geece Spain Potugal Table 30 Aea of land (% of aea of the county) with well suitable (no limitations), modeately suitable (modeate limitations), and unsuitable land (sevee limitations) fo cultivation; high input system County limitations no modeate sevee Fance Italy Geece Spain Potugal The type of input system does not affect aeas of land with sevee climatic estictions. When a low input system is assumed, vast aeas of suitable land (no and 102

95 modeate limitations) wee evaluated to occu in the Mediteanean counties except fo Fance. The pecentages of suitable land vay fom 34% (Potugal) to 64% (Geece). On most of the suitable land, modeate estictions pevail. Land with no limitations coves 15% o less of the aea of a county. In Geece, 5% of the aea was evaluated to have no limitations (Table 29). If a high input system instead of a low input system was assumed to be applied, the aea of suitable land deceases in Geece and Italy by 32% and 10% espectively. In Potugal, howeve, the aea was assessed to incease by 14% (cf. Tables 29 and 30). The elative change in suitable land, being positive o negative, depends on the aea of land with steep slopes (slope angle >25%), the CEC and the gypsum content (Table 28). In a high input system, the CEC and gypsum wee assumed not to esult in sevee estictions, wheeas in a low input system it was assessed to be a sevee limitation. A steep slope was assumed to impose sevee estictions in a high input system, wheeas it was expected to be a modeate estiction in a low input system. Even in a high input system the suitable aea in the Mediteanean counties is substantial, i.e. fom 32% (Italy) to 52% (Spain). Simila to the low input system most land of the suitable aea was evaluated to be coveed with land with modeate estictions. When a high input is assumed to be applied, land with no limitations coves 12% o less. Maps 11 and 12 show that NUTS-1 egions with 10% o moe land with no limitations, wee evaluated to be mainly located along the coast in Potugal and Spain. In Italy, these NUTS-1 egions ae found south of the Po basin, and they hadly occu in Geece. In nothwest Spain (NUTS-1: Nooeste; Appendices 18 and 20) the climatic conditions impose sevee estictions on olive cultivation (too wet and too cold). The NUTS-1 egion Madid has a elatively high pecentage of land with no limitations (32% and 25% fo low and high management conditions, espectively). This land is coveed by well dained, deep ootable Calcic Cambisols and Vetic Luvisols. These soils have a medium fie o fine textue and ae pedominantly situated in a level o sloping landscape. In Potugal, a clea distinction was assessed to occu between the nothen and the southen pat of the county. In pats of nothen Potugal (NUTS-1: Note do Continento) ago-climatic conditions pevail which wee expected to be unsuitable fo olive gowing. Moeove, in nothen Potugal well suitable soils only occu as pat of a compound land evaluation unit (Canbisols and Luvisols having a medium to fine textue and slopes steepe than 8%). In southen Potugal (NUTS-1: Sud do Continento), the soils contain less coase fagments than in the nothen pat, and about 32% of the soils have a medium f ie o fine textue, wheeas in nothen Potugal these soils cove only 6%. In southen Potugal the slopes ae also less steep. Modeately steep (15%-25%) and steep slopes (>25%) compise 53% of the aea of southen Potugal, wheeas this figue amounts to 69% in nothen Potugal. In Geece, a shallow ooting depth and a stony soil phase ae the dominant limiting factos fo the cultivation of olives. About 18%, 42% and 62% of the aea has a vey shallow ooting depth in nothen, cental and easten Geece (NUTS-1 egions: Ellas), espectively. A stony soil phase occus in 54%, 40% and 20% of these egions. Topogaphy, especially in the high input situation, is anothe limiting facto in Geece. In the Geek NUTS-1 egions, between 65% and 85% of the aea is coveed with modeately steep and steep slopes (slope angles >15%).

96 In the climatically suitable aeas fo olives within the EC, notable aeas of unsuitable land (>60% of the NUTS-1 egion) wee evaluated to occu in the NUTS-1 egions Note do Continento (P) and Ellas (East and S. Isl; GR). These esults can be deived fo the low input system fom Appendex 18. In high input conditions, this numbe of NUTS-1 egions inceases (Appendix 20). Mediteanee (F), Abuzzi-Molise (I), Ellas (Noth; GR) and Ellas (Cental; GR) also have moe than 60% land with sevee limitations. When the olive poducing system is changed fom a low to a high input system, the impact of topogaphy and natual fetility was evaluated diffeently. In most egions, the aea of land with sevee estictions inceases (cf. last column of Appenidices 18 and 20). Exceptions ae some NUTS-1 egions in Spain (Madid, Cento and Su) and Potugal. In Geece, the unsuitable aea was assessed to incease by 19% to 39%, and in Italy the unsuitable aea inceases by 8% to 19%. In southen Potugal the unsuitable aea, howeve, deceases by about 20%. Geneally, the aea of land with no limitations deceases when the inputs incease fom low to high (cf. fist columns Appendices 18 and 20). The NUTS-1 egion Canpania (I) was evaluated to be an exception. A substantial decease occus in the NUTS-1 egion Sicilia {I). Thee the aea of land with no limitations deceases by 17% (Maps 11 and 12; Appendices 18 and 20). The excessive aea of land with modeately steep slopes (40% of Sicilia has a slope of between 15%-25%) is the main eason fo the decease. In Italy and Geece the aea of land with modeate estictions also deceases when the inputs incease (cf. second column Appendices 18 and 20). In Geece in paticula, the decease is substantial, and amounts to about 18% to 38%. In Spain and Potugal, howeve, the aea of land with modeate limitations inceases when highe inputs ae applied. Olive yield A detailed chaacteization of the suitability classes within the diffeent NUTS-1 egions in tems of inputs and outputs was beyond the scope of this study. Some easily available data on the outputs expessed as yield, ae povided. De la Rosa and Moeia (1987) analysed the yield of olives fo table consumption and fo oil poducing in Andalucia (S). The aveage yield was 1.8 tonneshdy fo both puposes. They also povided data on the yield ange in the vaious egions within Andalucia. Fo table consumption, the ange was 0.8 to 2.4 tonneshdy and fo oil poducing 0.5 to 2.7 tonneshdy. Abdel-Razik et al. (1987) pesented yield data fo fesh olives fom vaious souces. In Tunisia, the aveage yield of fesh olives was about 1.3 tonneshdy, taking into account the phenomenum of altenate beaing. The aveage yield pe hectae in Egypt was estimated to be 1.6 to 1.9 tonneslha. When the poduction was inceased by applying impoved management techniques (e.g. pecise puning, pope pest and disease contol) the aveage poduction in the nothwesten coastal zone in Egypt inceased by about 50%, to a poduction of about 2.5 tonneshajy. Unde full iigation, annual yields of about 5 to 6 tonnes of fesh olives could be attained pe hectae. Hackett and Caolane (1982) epoted typical annual olive yields of 5 to 8 tonnesha fo the main olive poducing egions.

97 Competitive suitable land fo olives and othe cop types An estimate was made fo the aeas of land of the NUTS-1 egions which ae suitable fo both olives and othe types of cops (e.g. gass, ceeals and oot cops). The aea was assessed which is only suitable fo olives and not fo the othe cop types. Similaly, the aea suitable fo the othe types of cops and not fo olives was assessed. The common aea of unsuitable land was also estimated. The estimation pocedue used is explained in Chapte 4. The basic assumption is that suitable land is nested, at least at the level of a land evaluation unit, as illustated in Figue 8A. The esults fo a land evaluation unit wee aggegated (detemination of weighted aveages of the suitability classes using the aea of each of the land evaluation units and the suitabilities) and pesented fo the NUTS-1 egions. In Appendix 19 estimated competitive land, common unsuitable land fo olives and some othe cop types ae pesented fo the low management input level. These esults ae expessed as a pecentage of the aea of a NUTS-1 egion. In Appendix 19 the pecentage of emaining suitable land fo olives is also given if the cop has to compete with gass, ceeals o oot cops. Finally, the pecentage of land of a NUTS-1 egion is pesented which is unsuitable fo the poduction of olives, but which is still suitable fo gowing gass, ceeals o oot cops. In Appendix 21 the same esults ae given fo high management conditions. Because of climatic conditions, noth of southen Fance, no competitive land fo olives and othe types of cops was ecognized. In the Mediteanean aea of Fance, olives have to compete with gass o ceeals fo low input conditions on 20% of the land (Appendix 19). Because of highe demands of oot cops, the aea of competitive land fo olives with the oot cops is smalle, i.e. 16%. In the Mediteannean aea, common unsuitable land fo olives and the cop types gass, ceeals and oot cops is 49%, 49% and 52%, espectively. Land only suitable fo olive gowing and not fo the othe cop types coves substantial aeas in Geece and Italy (Appendix 19), and a elatively smalle aea in Spain and Potugal. Compaed with the low input situation, the aea of competitive land in the climatologically suitable aeas in a high input system geneally inceases slightly (cf. Appendices 19 and 21). In Italy and Geece, the unsuitable aea also inceases as mentioned above (cf. also Tables 29 and 30). In Spain the opposite occus. The assessment of competitive and unsuitable land was based on the assumption that suitable land is nested (Fig. 8A) as mentioned peviously. Usually this assumption is coect. Howeve, in the case of olives, occasionally non-nested suitable land may occu (Fig. 8B). Fo instance, some compound land evaluation units have some modeately steep slopes which ae suitable fo olives but unsuitable fo ceeals and oot cops, wheeas othe pats (subunits) ae assumed to be too dy to gow olives but wee not excluded fo ceeals and oot cops. This phenomenum of being nonnested, howeve, may only occu in the vey dy egions within the Euopean Communities. The ago-climatic zone of Mucia in southeasten Spain is an example of such an aea.

98 5.5 Gapes In the nothen membe states of the Euopean Communities gape gowing (Vitus, Vinifea L.) is almost impossible because of the govening tempeatue egime. The nothen limit boadly coincides with a line fom mid-fance to mid-gemany. Noth of this line some gape gowing pevails on shelteed locations, as epoted, fo instance, fo the United Kingdom by Skelton (1988). But, in the context of the evaluation of potentials within the EC, these aeas ae of little elevance. Nowadays, accoding to Euostat (1988) the pincipal aeas of gape gowing ae located in Spain (15740 km2), Italy (10968 kn2), and Fance (10492 km2). Smalle, but commecially impotant aeas, also occu in Potugal (2704 km2), Geece (1700 km2), and Gemany (1007 km2). Fom the total EC poduction of gapes in 1986, about 4% was poduced in West Gemany. A simila amount was poduced in Potugal, and slightly moe was havested in Geece, viz. 5%. The most significant gape poducing counties ae Italy, Fance and Spain, which accounted fo 38%, 30%. and 19% of EC poduction, espectively (Euostat, 1988). The gapes ae used fo wine and fo consumption as fesh gapes. In this section, the suitability of EC land fo the cultivation of vines poducing gapes is pesented. This suitability assessment has a geneal chaacte. So, land is only evaluated fo climatic and soil equiements which apply to a boad goup of gape vaieties. The geneal data of the small-scaled maps do not allow a vey specific outcome. In othe wods, small aeas with favouable conditions among aeas of land with inadequate chaacteistics (e.g. slopes diected towads the south at elatively high latitudes) could not be assessed in ou study. Afte explaining of the geneally applicable climatic and soil equiements, the pecentages of well suitable, modeately suitable and unsuitable land fo each NUTS-1 egion is given. Finally, some esults ae pesented on how fa suitable land fo gape gowing coincides with suitable land fo gass, ceeals and oot cops Evaluation citeia Geneally applicable soil and climatic equiements ae dealt with fo the gowing of vines which poduce gapes. South of the climatic limit fo gape gowing, most land is capable of poducing gapes. The vine places elatively low demands on the land in ode to suvive, and to occasionally poduce gapes. The land, howeve, is usually low-yielding. Fo commecial puposes a high poduction is equied. High poduction, howeve, can only be attained on appopiate land which also applies special cultivation measues. In ou study, the suitability assessment was diected at gape gowing fo commecial puposes. This implies that high quality ootstocks ae assumed to be used, and that egionally adapted vaieties ae planted. It was also assumed that modeate amounts of nitogen, phosphous and potassium wee applied, and that the input of biocides to contol pests and diseases was at the equied level. It was also assumed that the vine was adequately puned. Although yield esponse of gapes to iigation is high in some egions (e.g. Papadakis, 1975; Hackett and

99 Caolane, 1982), it was assumed that no imgation wate was applied. Thus, a ainfed gape gowing entepise using a elatively high input was consideed in ou study. To evaluate EC land fo gape gowing, fou seveity levels wee distinguished, i.e. no, slight, modeate and sevee limitations. The seveity levels specify the degee to which a paticula equiement is fulfilled by the land. Land with no o slight limitations was classified as well suitable o suitable land, wheeas land with modeate limitations can only be used fo gape gowing when eithe special measues ae conducted, usually equiing highe inputs, o when a substantially lowe yield than unde optimalconditions is accepted. Land with sevee limitations is unsuitable fo commecial gape poduction. South of the climatic limit this unsuitable land, can, howeve, have some low potentials fo poducing gapes fo domestic puposes. The evaluation citeia applied in ou study ae summaized in Table 31. Climatic equiements Gapes belong to the goup of cops equiing a cool season, they cannot be gown in a continuously wam climate. Thei chilling equiements ae analogous to those of wheat, and thei heat equiements ae appoximately those of maize (e.g. Papadakis, 1970). In fact the vine demands long, wam to hot, dy summes and cool wintes (Dent and Young, 1981). This implies that the vine in its domant peiod can esist tempeatues down to -lo C and -29OC in the coldest month. The maximum tempeatue of coldest months should be above S C. If we conside the tempeatue egime of the coldest month only, gapes could be gown almost anywhee within the EC. Fost esistance, howeve, duing the gowing peiod is low. Duing the gowing peiod, an appopiate base tempeatue is 10 C (Hackett and Caolane, 1982), wheeas De la Rosa and Moena (1987) mention a minimum tempeatue of between 5OC and 10 C. Accoding to the fome authos, acceptable aveage tempeatues duing the gowing peiod ae between 13OC and 30 C. The tempeatue should pefeably be in the ange of 20 C - 2S C (Dent and Young, 1981). Acceptable uppe tempeatue limits of 35OC (Hackett and Caolane, 1982) and between 40 C and 4S C have been epoted (De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). In ou study, two tempeatue citeia wee applied (Table 31). Fist, the mean of the maximum tempeatues duing the six wamest months must be 21 C o moe (Papadakis, 1975), and, second, the numbe of months with an aveage tempeatue in the favouable ange, i.e. between 13OC and 30 C (Hackett and Caolane, 1982), must be five o moe. In addition to cetain tempeatue equiements, the vine has cetain humidity equiements. Although a high yield vine needs at least mm wate fo optimal gowth, the cop demands a ainless summe (e.g. Papadakis, 1970). Hence, gapes should pefeably be gown on soils with a high soil wate supply capacity. The cop benefits fom a low humidity, pimaily to pevent all kinds of diseases. The fuit is not well potected and can be spoiled befoe ipening (Papadakis, 1975; Hackett and Caolane, 1982). Theefoe, in ou study we intoduced the citeion that the ainfall in the peiod May-Octobe should be less than 700 mm. This figue was established by analysing ainfall data of egions with an adequate tempeatue egime, but which wee known fo thei sevee estiction fo gowing gapes owing to

100 humidity easons as epoted by Papadakis (1970). The citeion of 700 mm should be used with eseve in egions outside the EC, because a limited numbe of egions wee analysed. Soil equiements The following soil equiements wee distinguished: soil-physical quality, soil wemess, dought susceptibility, slope, salinity, alkalinity, and soil-chemical aspects, such as base satuation, cation exchange capacity, and calcium cabonate content. Soil-physical quality The vine pefes a deep ootable soil. Hence, soils with a depth of less than 40 cm impose modeate estictions fo gape gowing, and soils with a depth of less than 10 cm wee assumed to be unsuitable (Hackett and Caolane, 1983; De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). Gapes can be gown well on light textued soils (e.g. Dent and Young, 1981; De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). Hence, soil textues that wee coase athe than fine wee assumed to have no limitations. Fine textued, and vey fine textued soils wee assumed to impose modeate and sevee limitations, espectively. Soil wetness High gape yields can be attained on well dained soils, wheeas the yield deceases on land with wette conditions (Dent and Young, 1981; Hackett and Caolane, 1982; De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). Theefoe, vey pooly and pooly dained soils wee assumed to have sevee limitations, and tempoaily pooly dained soils modeate limitations. Othe land was assumed to have no limitations. These citeia efe to conditions needed in ode to each high yields. To suvive, the vine can esist much wette conditions. Accoding to Hackett and Caolane (1982), vines can even withstand watelogged soils fo about one o two weeks. Dought susceptibility As mentioned above, the vine equies at least mm wate duing the gowing season (De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). Accoding to Dent and Young (1981) the equied amount of wate vaies between mm. These equiements apply to high yield conditions. In fact, the vine is dought esistant, and can withstand vey sevee peiods of dought. Unde these conditions, howeve, gape poduction is vey low. Thee is a lage diffeence between the equiements fo suvival and fo commecial poduction (Hackett and Caolane, 1982). A lage decision tee was developed to deive the seveity level fo dought susceptibility fo a high yield to be attained. It is beyond the scope of this epot to pesent the full decision tee. The decision tee is schematically pesented in Table 31. Soil and land chaacteistics, such as summe ainfall (Apil-Septembe), soil dainage, soil textue, and soil depth, play a vital ole in assessing the seveity level. If the summe ainfall is above 500 mm no dought susceptibility was assumed to pevail, wheeas a ainfall of less than 200 mm was assumed to impose sevee limitations. All land with a vey poo, a poo, tempoaily poo, and an impefect soil dainage was assumed to have no dought stess because of oot zone supply by capillay ise. The seveity level of well dained, vey well dained, and excessively dained land with a summe ainfall of between nm was assumed to be dependent on land chaacteistics, such as soil textue and soil depth.

101 Table 31 Summay of climatic and soil equiements used to evaluate EC land fo gape gowing Requiement Limitation no slight modeate sevee Tempeatue egime * Peiod length Topt? >= 150 days Tmaxgl) c21 C Peiod length Topt c 150 days Humidity Rainfall May- Octobe < 700 mm Rainfall May- Octobe >= 700 mm Soil-physical quality * soil depth > 60 cm soil depth between cm soil depth between cm soil depth c= 10 cm * coase, medium, medium fine textued soils fine textued soils vey fine textued soils Soil wetness impefectly, modeately good, good, and excessive soil dainage tempoaily poo soil dainage vey poo, poo soil dainage Slope 8-15% % > 25% Soil-chemical conditions n.. CEC between 5-15 BS < 50% CEC c= 5 n.. n.. * pesence of CaCO, absence of CaCO, Salinity and alkalinity n.. n.. EC >= 4 ESP >= 15% Dought susceptibility soils with vey poo, poo, tempoaily poo, and impefect soil dainage, and peat soils iespective of othe land chaacteistics n.. * egions with a psume) >= 500 mm egions with a Psum <=200 mm

102 Requiement Limitation no slight modeate sevee * Psum = mm; Psum = mm; -soils with soil -soils with soil depth > 60 cm, and depth cm -soils with soil with a medium, a depth cm medium fine, o without soil a fine soil texphases tue and without soil phases Psum = mm; -soils with soil depth > 60 cm without soil phases -soils with soil depth cm with a medium, a medium, o a fine soil textue without soil phases Psum = mm; -soils with soil depth cm with soil phases -soils with soil depth cm with a coase o vey fine soil textue and without soil phases Psum = mm; -soils with soil depth cm with a coase, o vey fine soil textue without soil phases -soils with soil depth > 80 cm with soil phases Psum = mm; -soils with soil depth cm with soil phases Psum = mm; -soils with soil depth c 40 cm -soils with soil depth cm with soil phases. ') Tmax : mean maximum tempeatue in the six wamest months; g 2, n..: hmitations do not pevail; 3, Topt: aveage tempeatue in acceptable ange, i.e. 13OC and 30 C; 4, BS: base satuation; CEC: cation exchange capacity (in meq1100 g. soil); 6, EC: electical conductivity (in mmholcm); 7, ESP: exchangeable sodium pecentage; Psum: summe ainfall (Apil-Septembe). Psum = mm; -soils with soil depth > 80 cm iespective of soil texhe o soil phases -soils with soil depth cm with a medium, a medium fine, o a fine soil textue without soil phases -soils with a soil depth c 60 cm iespective of soil textue o soil phases Psum = mm; -soils with soil depth cm with a coase o a vey fine soil textue iespective of soil phases -soils with a soil depth cm with a medium, a medium fine, o a fine soil textue and with soil phases

103 Slope Land located on a slope may, depending on the slope oientation, benefit fom a highe exposue to sunlight. In the nothen egions, such as West Gemany and Alsace (F), this is a vey dominant aspect. Convesely, slopes hampe vaious management opeations. Although adapted equipment has been developed, slopes above 15% wee assumed to impose some limitations. At least highe inputs ae equied to gow and havest gapes on this land (e.g. expensive equipment and gafting). Hence, land on slopes of between 15% and 25% was assumed to have modeate limitations, and land with slope angles above 25% has sevee limitations. Salinity and alkalinity The vine has some toleance to salts in the oot zone (e.g. Dent and Young, 1981; Hackett and Caolane, 1982; De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). Hence, if electical conductivity (EC) is below 4 mmho/cm, and if the exchangeable sodium pecentage (ESP) is below 15% no limitations wee assumed to occu. Othewise, sevee limitations wee expected to occu. Soil chemical conditions The vine pefes soils with a ph geate than 5.5; the favouable ange is (Hackett and Caolane, 1982; De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). Hence, acid soils with an estimated base-satuation (BS) below 50%, wee assumed to have modeate limitations. Land with a BS geate than 50% has no limitations. Futhemoe, the pesence of CaC03 was assumed to have a positive effect on yield. Theefoe, land without CaC03 in the soil was found to have slight limitations, and land with CaC03 no limitations. The cation exchange capacity (CEC) affects the availability of nutients. Futhemoe, the application of nutients to soils with a low CEC can moe easily esult in losses to the envionment. Soils with a vey low CEC (c 5 meq1100 g. soil) wee assumed to have modeate limitations, and soils with a low CEC (5-15 meq1100 g. soil) slight limitations. Soils with highe CECs wee assumed to have no limitations Suitability fo gapes In this section the suitability fo gape gowing in the Euopean Communities is explained. The suitability is pesented fo ainfed conditions. Some yield data ae also povided. Finally, some infomation is given on how fa suitable land fo gape gowing is competitive with othe types of land use. Suitable and unsuitable aeas The suitability of EC land fo gape gowing is quantitatively analysed using ALES. Each of the appoximately 2800 land evaluation units (unique combination of soil and climate) was allocated to a suitability class having no, slight, modeate, o sevee limitations. If land evaluation units ae compound, the suitability class of the subunits was detemined sepaately. Then, fo each of the land evaluation units the subunits with identical suitability classes wee combined, and pecentages coveed by the suitability classes computed. Suitability was detemined by using the so-called

104 maximum limitation method (e.g. Sys, 1985; Rossite, 1990). So, the maximum limitation of a single land quality o land chaacteistic of a land evaluation unit detemines the suitability, iespective of all the othe qualities o chaacteistics. All these opeations wee caied out using ALES (Section 3.3). The suitability assessment pe land evaluation unit is too detailed fo futhe pocessing by the Dutch Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy. Hence, the esults wee aggegated to obtain weighted aveage figues fo the EC administative egions at NUTS-1 level. Fo each NUTS- 1 egion the elative aea coveed by the suitability classes is pesented (Appendix 22). On Map 13 the pecentage of land of each NUTS- 1 egion, which has no o slight limitations fo gape gowing is given. Despite some dispesion due to the size of the NUTS-1 egions, fo example Bassin Paisien, the nothen limit fo gape gowing can be clealy ecognized on this map. Besides aggegation to NUTS-1 levels, aggegations wee also caied out to obtain esults fo the EC membe states and the whole EC. Slightly less than 1% of EC land was assessed to have no limitations at all fo gowing gapes fo commecial puposes. About 8% of EC land has slight limitations, and 5% has modeate limitations. This means that about 15% of EC land was evaluated to be suitable, and about 85% unsuitable fo gape gowing. About 45% of EC land is eithe too cold o too wet to gow gapes. It is likely that this pecentage is somewhat highe. In ago-climatic egions with substantial elevation diffeences the selected meteoological stations ae epesentative of the low elevation locations (Section 3.2). This implies that potentials of land with high elevations ae oveestimated in a climatic sense. Land with climatic estictions is pimaily located noth of the climatic limit (Map 13). Lage aeas of land with sevee climatic limitations also occu in nothwest Spain, cental Spain, Massif Cental (F), southwest Fance, and nothen Italy. Most of these aeas cannot be ecognized on Map 13, due to the aggegation pocess and the size of the NUTS-1 egions. In aeas with no sevee tempeatue o humidity limitations, the dominant eason fo land found to be unsuitable is a a sevee dought susceptibility. Sevee dought stess was assessed to pevail on slightly moe than 35% of EC land. Table 32 Aea of land (% of the county) with no, slight, modeate, and sevee limitations fo gape gowing fo commecial puposes Limitations no slight modeate sevee West Gemany Fance Italy Luxemboug Geece Spain Potugal only counties with some suitable land ae given

105 Suitable land fo commecial gape gowing occus in eight of the twelve EC membe states (Table 32). In Ieland, the United Kingdom, Denmak, the Nethelands, and Belgium no suitable land was found to occu because of sevee climatic limitations. In most counties with suitable land the aea with sevee limitations was assessed to be moe than 90%, viz. in West Gemany, Luxemboug, Geece, Spain, and Potugal. In Fance and Italy, howeve, a vast pecentage of aea with suitable land pevails, viz. 32% and 25%. In West Gemany, moe than 80% of the aea was evaluated to have sevee climatic estiction fo gape gowing. As mentioned above it is likely that the Geman aea with sevee climatic estictions is somewhat lage. The main eason fo the oveestimation is because the meteoological stations selected (Reinds et al., 1991) wee not epesentative of the highe elevations. Anothe impotant sevee limitation in Gemany was found to be dought susceptibility, which occus on about 9% of Geman land. The small aea with no limitations is coveed with medium textued Fluvi-Calcaic Fluvisols. In Fance moe than 40% of the aea was evaluated to have sevee climatic estictions fo gape gowing. Slightly less than 20% of the aea without sevee tempeatue and humidity estictions, was still assessed to be unsuitable owing to a high dought susceptibility. About 30% of Fench land has slight o modeate limitations. Vaious types of limitations cause these seveity levels. Fom these types, the soil-chemical conditions, wee evaluated to be the most impotant. Slight o modeate limitations with espect to the soil-chemical conditions occu on about 11% of Fench land. These ae caused by a low base satuation, a low CEC, o absence of CaC03. The small aea with no limitations is coveed with medium textued Fluvi- Calcaic Fluvisols and medium textued Calcic Cambisols. About 12% of Italian land has sevee limitations because of the tempeatue egime and humidity. As mentioned above it is likely that the aea with sevee climatic estictions is somewhat lage. A sevee dought susceptibility was evaluated to be the dominant eason fo unsuitable land in Italy. These sevee estictions occu on slightly less than 60% of Italian land. On the suitable land, which coves 25% of Italian land, the dominant limitations ae the soilchemical conditions. About 10% of Italy has a low CEC, a low base satuation, o absence of CaC03. On 8% slight o modeate limitations due to dought susceptibility occu. In this boad evaluation analysis no Italian land was found to occu with no limitations at all. The smallscaled maps used ae the main eason fo this undeestimation. Moe than 90% of Luxemboug was evaluated to be unsuitable fo gape gowing. Sevee climatic estictions ae the pincipal eason. On the aea with slight and modeate limitations, dought susceptibility, soil-chemical conditions, and topogaphy ae the limiting aspects. Land with no limitations was assessed not to occu. In Geece, unsuitable land usually has a high dought susceptibility combined with sevee slope and soil-physical quality limitations. Land with these sevee limitations cove slightly less than 70% of Geek temtoy. Anothe 20% of Geek land has a high dought susceptibility only. Land with slight limitations mainly have less optimal

106 soil-chemical conditions. Geek land was evaluated to have modeate limitations pedominantly because of the susceptibility to dought. In Geece, the highest pecentage of land with no limitations at all pevails. This land is usually coveed with medium textued Fluvi-Calcaic Fluvisols. About 30% of Spain has sevee limitations because of the tempeatue egime and humidity. On anothe 55% of the Spanish aea a high dought susceptibility pevails. In Spain, land was assessed to have slight and modeate limitations owing to simila estictions as in Geece, viz. soil-chemical conditions and dought susceptibility, espectively. Accoding to the boad analysis used in ou study, no Spanish land without limitations was assessed to occu. In Potugal slightly less than 60% of its teitoy has a high dought susceptibility only and no othe sevee limitations. On anothe 30% this type of estiction is combined with sevee limitations of slope, o soil-physical conditions. On the suitable land slight o modeate limitations mainly pevail because of limitations of the slope, and the soil-chemical conditions. Accoding to the boad analysis used in ou study, no Spanish land without limitations was assessed to occu. The distibution of suitable land ove the NUTS-1 egions is shown in Appendix 22. Between 10% and 20% suitable land was evaluated to occu in the following NUTS-1 egions: Canpania, Abuzzi-Molise, Sud, and Sadegna in Italy, Noth Ellas in Geece, and Madid and Est in Spain. Moe than 20% suitable land pevails in: Hessen, Rheinland-Pfalz, and Saaland in West Gemany, Bassin Paisien, Est, Ouest, Sud-Ouest, Cente-Est, and Mediteanee in Fance, and Nod-Ovest, Lombadia, Nod-Est, Emilia-Romagne, Cento, and Lazio in Italy. In the othe NUTS-1 egions less than 10% suitable land was evaluated to occu. In the Mediteanean counties the high dought susceptibility was evaluated as imposing sevee estictions fo most land being used fo commecial gape gowing. The high dought susceptibility is usually combined with sevee limitations of slope and soil-physical conditions. Gape yield A detailed chaacteization of the suitability classes within the diffeent NUTS-1 egions in tems of inputs and outputs was beyond the scope of this study. Some easily available data on the outputs expessed as yield, ae povided. Yield of gapes depends on vaiety, age, and many othe cultivation pactices. Yield figues ae often not pesented in weight pe unit aea; especially in expeimental tials, weights ae indicated pe vine. Accoding to Hofacke (1974) the yield of the Riesling gape vaied between 2.9 kg and 4.1 kg pe vine among thee mid-geman locations. In his tials the vines wee spaced 1.7 m apat in the ow, and the ows wee 1.5 m apat. Unde these conditions yields of between 11.6 and 16.4 t ha-' y-' can be eached. Klenet (1972) epoted yields of a Riesling-Tanine vaiety of between 17.3 and 21.3 t ha-' y-' unde mid-geman conditions. He also demonstated that a eduction in adiation on sunny days by 60% esulted in a yield decease fom 30% to 65% compaed with nomal conditions. This esult illustates the impotance of exposue to sun in the nothen egions of the EC. In Andalusia the aveage gape yield amounted to 13.6 t ha-' y-'. In this egion, the yields vay between about 2

107 t ha-' y-' and 15 t ha-' y-' (De la Rosa and Moena, 1987). Simila yields of the muscadine gape have been e oted in the southeast aea of the United States (Goldy, 1988), viz. 15 to 20 t ha-' y- f Hacken and Caolane (1982) mentioned gape yields fo the majo global poduction locations of up to 30 t ha-' y-'. Howeve, they do not specify the chaacteistics of the locations whee these high yields have been obtained. If we conside the statistical data on yields and aceages within the EC (Euostat, 1988), the above-mentioned yields have not been eached on aveage. In 1986, the oveall aveage yield of gapes amounted to about 7.2 t ha-' y-' within the EC. The highest aveage yields wee attained in West Gemany, Italy, Fance, and Geece, i.e. 13.1, 10.6, 8.9 and 8.8 t ha-' y-', espectively. Relatively low aveage yields wee epoted in Potugal and Spain, i.e. 4.1 and 3.7 t ha-' y''. Competitive suitable land fo gapes and othe cop types An estimate was made fo the aeas of land of a NUTS-1 egion which is suitable fo both gapes and othe types of cops, i.e. intensively managed gassland, ceeals and oot cops. The aea which is only suitable fo eithe gapes o fo one of the othe types of cops was also assessed. The common aea of unsuitable land was also estimated. Suitable land was defined as land with no. slight. o modeate limitations. The estimation pocedue used was explained in Chapte 4. The basic assumption is that suitable land is nested at least at the level of a land evaluation unit, as illustated in Figue 8A. The esults fo a land evaluation unit wee aggegated (detemination of weighted aveages of the suitability classes using the aea of each of the land evaluation units and its suitabilities) and pesented fo the NUTS-1 egions. In Appendix 23 estimated competitive land, and common unsuitable land fo gapes and some othe cop types ae pesented fo ainfed conditions. These esults ae expessed as pecentages of the aea of a NUTS-1 egion. In Appendix 23 the pecentage of suitable land fo gape gowing only is also given if gapes have to compete with gass, ceeals o oot cops. Finally, the pecentage of land of a NUTS-1 egion which is unsuitable fo gape poduction, but which is suitable fo gass, ceeals o oot cops is pesented. Relatively high pecentages with competitive land (>20% of NUTS-1 egion) occu in some egions in West Gemany, Fance and Italy. Examples ae: Hessen in West Gemany, Est, Ouest, and Mediteanee in Fance, and Emilia-Romagne in Italy. Aeas in NUTS-1 egions only suitable fo gape gowing ae small. When gape gowing has to compete with gass o ceeal gowing, this aea is less than 14% maximum, and is usually even less than 10%. When gape gowing has to compete with oot cops, in some Geman, Fench and Italian egions, the aea suitable fo gape gowing is only substantially highe than when the gapes have to compete with gass o ceeals. Fo instance, in the NUTS-1 egions Saaland and Lombadia aeas suitable fo gapes and unsuitable fo oot cops ae 44% and 32% espectively. The main eason fo this elatively high pecentage of suitable land fo gapes only is the pecentage of soils with a fine soil textue in these egions, which was assumed to be unsuitable fo oot cops (Reinds and Van Lanen, in pep.). The high pecentages of unsuitable land fo gapes and the othe cop types (>75% of NUTS-1 egion) wee evaluated to pevail in Mediteanean egions such as Campania, Abuzzi-Molise, and Sadegna in Italy, Noth and Cental Ellas in Geece, and Note do Continente in Potugal.

108 The assessment of competitive and unsuitable land was based on the assumption that suitable land is nested (Fig. 8A). Usually this assumption was coect. Howeve, in the case of gapes, non-nested suitable land may occasionally occu (Fig. 8B). Fo instance, some compound land evaluation units have subunits with modeately steep slopes (1525%) which wee evaluated as suitable fo gape gowing but unsuitable fo ceeals and oot cops. Convesely, othe subunits of these units wee assessed to be too dy to gow gapes but wee not excluded fo ceeals and oot cops. This phenomenum of being non-nested, howeve, only occus in the dy egions within the Euopean Communities.

109 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The pocedue developed in ou study, which links a system to captue expet knowledge to a geogaphical infomation system (Chapte 2), has poved to be vey efficient in evaluating natual esouces of land fo vaious peennial cops in a qualitative way. Afte the time-consuming stoage of the huge amounts of soil and climate data and establishing a pocedue to pocess the data and esults (Chapte 3), evaluations could be apidly caied out. Expet knowledge chaacteistics fo qualitative land evaluation could eadily be captued in a compute system. Evaluation of a numbe of peennial cops shows that about 30% o less of the total EC aea was assessed to be suitable fo poduction (no, slight o modeate limitations). Nomal gowing less demanding tee species ae an exception; the suitable aea fo this goup amounts to slightly moe than 50% of the EC aea. Small suitable aeas wee evaluated to occu fo citus cops, i.e. 2% unde ainfed conditions and 6% unde iigated conditions. Fo othe heat-equiing cops, such as olives and gapes, lage suitable aeas wee evaluated to pevail. About 15% of EC land was assessed to be suitable fo ainfed gape gowing, and about 25% is suitable fo olives. Suitable land fo fuit tees species (ainfed o iigated) was evaluated to cove about 30% of EC land. A simila figue was obtained fo fast gowing tee species, and nomal gowing moe demanding tees species. The suitability of the individual membe states of the EC vaies significantly among the counties and fo the peennial cops consideed (Tables 18, 19,20,22,23, 26, 27,29,30, and 3 1). The nothen membe states, i.e. Denmak, the United Kingdom, Ieland, the Nethelands, and Belgium, wee assessed to be unsuitable fo heatdemanding cops, such as citus, olives and gapes. West Gemany and Luxemboug wee evaluated to be unsuitable fo the cultivation of the fist two cops, but some land was evaluated to be suitable fo gapes, i.e. 8% and 7% of the county, espectively. In the above-mentioned membe states the suitable aea fo fuit tees and foest tees amounts to 42% to 58% in West Gemany, 23% to 48% in the Nethelands, 38% to 72% in Belgium, 23% to 45% in the United Kingdom, 32% to 59% in Ieland, and 34% to 53% in Denmak. Lage suitable aeas, howeve, occu fo nomal gowing less demanding tee species, i.e. fom 57% in the United Kingdom to 93% in Belgium. All consideed cops can gow in Fance. The heat-demanding cops such as citus and olives, howeve, can only be cultivated in southen Fance. Theefoe, less than 10% of Fance was evaluated to be suitable fo these cops. The suitable Fench aea fo fuit tees, foest tees, and gapes vaies fom 32% to 52%. Simila to the othe counties, the land potential in Fance fo gowing nomal gowing less demanding tee species is highe, i.e. 71%. In the Mediteanean membe states Italy, Geece, Spain and Potugal, all cops consideed can be cultivated. Relatively lage aeas of land wee assessed to be suitable fo gowing olives in all these counties; the pecentage of suitable land

110 vaies fom 32% to 64%. In Italy consideable aeas wee evaluated to be suitable fo foest tees, i.e. between 20% and 36%, and fo ainfed gape gowing, i.e. 25%. The potential fo cultivating fuit tees, and especially citus, is lowe in Italy. Unde ainfed conditions, 10% of Italian land is suitable fo fuit tees, and no moe than 2% fo citus cultivation. When iigation was assumed to be applied, suitable land inceases. Then, 17% and 9% of Italian land was evaluated to be suitable fo both goups of cops. Unde ainfed conditions, suitable land in Geece, Spain and Potugal was assessed to be less than 10% fo most cops othe than olives. Only the nomal gowing less demanding tee species in Potugal and Spain exceed the figue of lo%, they cove 12% and 18% of suitable land. When imgation was assumed to be applied, suitable aeas in these counties incease. Fo instance, in Geece suitable land fo fuit tees inceases fom 5% to 11% because of iigation. In Potugal and Spain the incease is even moe ponounced. In these two counties, the suitable aea unde ainfed conditions was evaluated to be 4% and lo%, wheeas unde iigated conditions suitable land amounts to 23% and 24%, espectively. Geneally, in the Mediteanean counties, suitable aeas fo cops which can be gown all ove the EC, ae smalle than in the nothen membe states. This implies that suitable land is not unifomly distibuted ove the EC. A non-unifom distibution of suitable land fo these cops also applies to some, individual counties (Appendices 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 and 22, and Maps 1, 2 and 3, and fom 7 to 13 inclusive). Fo instance, the NUTS-1 egions in the nothen pat of the United Kingdom (e.g. Scotland, Noth) have significantly lowe pecentages of suitable land than those in the east and south (e.g. East Anglia, South East, Midlands). In Fance, distinct diffeences in pecentages of suitable land can be ecognized between the south (Mediteanee) and the noth (e.g. Bassin Paisien, Nod-Pas-de-Calais). Examples of NUTS-1 egions with vey low pecentages of suitable land fo most cops consideed ae: Note do continente (P), Cento (Sp), Ellas (East and South islands; G), Sicilia (It), and Noth (UK). Examples with high pecentages ae: Schlewig-Holstein and Bayem (D), Nod-Pas-de-Calais (F), Nod-Est (It), Region Wallone (B), Denmak, and South East (UK). Although the pecentage of suitable land fo a cetain cop in most egions is (fa) below loo%, the total EC aea of suitable land fo the cop is usually sufficient to significantly incease poduction if only the cop in question wee to be cultivated on all this land. Hendiks et al. (1991) analysed the egional potential fo thee diffeent goups of tee species, and estimated that if all the suitable land wee to be affoested, timbe poduction would twice exceed consumption. Anothe example is the suitable aea fo fuit tees in the Mediteanean counties, which is two to fifteen times geate than the aea cuently used. Ou study, howeve, shows that suitable land fo a cetain cop is also usually suitable fo anothe cop, and unsuitable land is usally unsuitable fo most cops. This means that the cops geneally have to compete fo the same tacts of suitable land. Aeas of competitive land wee assessed fo combinations of most cops consideed (Appendices 7,8,9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21 and 23). Only when cops o management systems have diffeent equiements, may pecentages of competitive land be elatively low (e.g. low input olive poducing vesus oot-cop gowing on intensively managed fams). The question of which cop can gow whee best, is not answeed in ou study

111 because it depends on EC policies fomulated fo ual land. The Dutch Scientific Council fo Govenment Policy will addess these questions in a subsequent study using ou esults as input data. Usually, the cop yield which can be obtained on land with a paticula suitability diffes consideably between the egions, because of ago-climatological conditions. In tems of poduction potential, one unit of suitable land in the Mediteanean counties cannot simply be eplaced by the same unit in the nothen membe states (Van Lanen, in pess). In the Mediteanean counties, the yield of land with a paticula suitability class is often highe than in the nothen counties. Thus, the pocess of allocating cop yield data to a paticula suitability class must conside the ago-climatological egion. The esults pesented in ou study give an indication of the suitability of EC land fo some peennial cops. They do not epesent the absolute tuth. Insufficient data on natual esouces and insufficient knowledge on cop and management equiements may esult in a deviation between the esults and eality. In fact, we ae in an exploation phase of assessing the egional poduction potential. The esults of ou study can be impoved if: - a epesentative soil pofile fo the dominant soil is detemined. The desciption should pefeably include the ange and pobability distibution of the land chaacteistics; - the associated soil units of the mapping units ae detemined. Thei aea and chaacteistics must be included. These data also need to be gatheed fo inclusions on the mapping units; - moe meteoological stations wee available, especially those located on highe elevations. In addition to the lack of soil and climatic data, esticted knowledge on cop and management equiements advesely affects the eliability of the esults. Fo instance, no pecise definitions pevail fo the uppe limit of the slope which still pemits land to be used fo a paticula activity. Only boad desciptions ae available. Sensitivity analyses, fo instance, show that if the same slope equiements wee applied fo iigated fuit as fo ainfed fuit (Table 21), the suitable aea fo iigated fuit cultivation would be substantially lage. Then, in about 20% of the NUTS-1 egions between 5% and 10% moe suitable land would occu, and in about 30% of the NUTS-1 egions the incease in suitable land would be between 10% and 20% (cf. Table 23). In 10% of the NUTS-1 egions the incease in suitable land would be as lage as 20% to 30%. Decision citeia on pemissible slope angles ae especially elevant in the Mediteanean egions whee less suitable land occus when high demands ae defined. Usually, a lowe sensitivity of the decision citeia was detemined as found fo the slope. Fo example, if the suitability of EC land fo citus cultivation was caied out without consideing.a modeate limitation if CaC03 is pesent (Table 25), the aea with no limitations hadly inceases. In less than 15% of the NUTS-1 egions the aea with no limitations would incease by moe than 5%. The maximum incease in land with no limitations in a cetain NUTS-1 egion amounts to 9% (cf. Table 26).

112 Ou evaluation esults could also be impoved if knowledge on the effects of land (e.g. tempeatue egime, humidity) on the quality of the havested poducts (e.g. size, colou, taste) wee to incease. Pobably, suitable land fo fuit tees in Ieland and in the NUTS-1 egions of the westen United Kingdom is oveestimated because of insufficient knowledge about the quality of the poducts. In ou study, land suitability was exploed fo each peennial cop sepaately and, subsequently, competitive land was detemined fo the cops consideed. In this way, competitive land can only be appoximated as explained in Chapte 4. In following studies, an altenative option could be a mutual evaluation of the land fo all cops. This evaluation would yield moe eliable esults about which land units ae suitable fo many cops, and which ae only suitable fo one cop o a limited numbe of cops. This compehensive analysis, howeve, would not answe the question of which cop gows whee best. These types of questions can only be popely addessed when land use policies ae consideed.

113 REFERENCES ABDEL-RAZIK, M.S., S.M.0. EL-DARIER, H.S. HUSSEIN and G.W.J. VAN DE VEN, Fuit tee cultivation in the nothwesten coastal zone of Egypt. In: M.A. Ayyad and H. van Keulen (Eds.). The 'Maiut' poject, Final Repot, pat 2. CABO, Wageningen. Appendix 10, CABO Veslag n. 68, 56 pp. BOUMA, J., Using soil suvey data fo quantitative land evaluation. Advances in Soil Science. Vol. 9. pp BOUMA, J. and H.A.J. VAN LANEN, Tansfe functions and theshold values: fom soil chaacteistics to land qualities. In: K.J. Beek, P.A. Buough and D.E. McComack (Eds.), Quantified Land Evaluation Pocedues, Poc. of Int. Wokshop, ITC Publication Numbe 6, pp BREGT, A.K., J.D. BULENS, G.H.J. DE KONING, & G.J. REINDS, (1989). Geogaphical Infomation System and cop poduction potential within the Euopean Community. Poc. 4th Annual ESRI Euopean Use Confeence. Rome. 10 pp. BRIGGS, D.J. and D. WILSON, The state of the envionment in the Euopean Community in Commission of the Euopean Communities, EUR 10633, Luxemboug, 370 pp. BUIS, J., Histoia Foestis. HES uitgeves, Utecht, 1058 pp. BULENS, J.D., A.K. BREGT, G.H.J. DE KONING, G.J. REINDS, C.A. VAN DIEPEN, & H.A.J. VAN LANEN, (in pep.). GIs suppoting cop poduction potential eseach fo the Euopean Communities. In: EGIS'90 Poc. of Fist Euopean Confeence on Geogaphical Infomation Systems, eds. J. Hats, H.F.L. Ottens, H.J. Scholten & D.A. Ondaatje. EGIS Foundation, Utecht, Vol. 1, pp BULENS, J.D., and A.K. BREGT, (in pess). Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. I: GIs and data model. WRR Technical Woking Document, The Hague. CEC, Soil map of the Euopean Communities, 1 : Commission of the Euopean Communities, Diectoate-Geneal fo Agicultue, Luxemboug, 124 pp., 7 sheets and legend. DATATREE, DTM-PC efeence manual and opeation guide. DataTee Inc., Waltman, MA. DENNEY, J.O., and MCEACHERN, Modeling the themal adaptability of the olive (Olea euopaea L.) in Texas. Agicultual and Foest Meteoology, 35:

114 DENT, D., and A. YOUNG, Soil suvey and land evaluation. Geoge Allen & Unwin, London, 278 pp. DIEPEN, C.A. VAN, G.H.J. KONING, G.J. REINDS, J.D. BULENS and H.A.J. VAN LANEN, Regional analysis of physical cop poduction potential in the Euopean Communities. In: The geenhouse effect and pimay poductivity in Euopean ago-ecosystems (eds. J. Goudiaan, H. van Keulen & H.H. van Laa), Pudoc, Wageningen, pp EUROSTAT, Statistical yeabook. Theme 5 Agicultual, Foesty and Fisheies. Luxemboug. 262 pp. EVANS, J A key to Eucalypts in Bitain and Ieland. Foesty commission. Booklet 50. He Majesty's stationey office, London, 23 pp. FABIAO, A., H.A. PERSSON and E. STEEN, Gowth dynamics of supeficial oots in Potuguese plantations of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. studied with a mesh bag technique. Plant and Soil 83 (2): FAO, A famewok fo land evaluation. FA0 Soils Bulletin 32, Rome, 72 pp. FAO, Repot on the ago-ecological zones poject. Vol. 1 Methodology and esults fo Afica. Wold Resouces Repot 48, FAO, Rome, 158 pp. GOLDY, R.G., Vaiation in some yield detemining components in muscadine gapes and thei coelation to yield. Euphyica 39: HAAREN, H.A.J. VAN, G.J. JANSEN, J. VAN DEN BURG en M. DE KAh4, Populieen in Nedeland. Pudoc, Wageningen, 175 pp. HACKETT, C., and J. CAROLANE, Edible hoticultual cops. A compendium of infomation on fuit, vegetable, spice and nut species. Academic pess. Sydney, New Yok and London. HENDRIKS, C.M.A., H.A.J. VAN LANEN and J.D. BULENS, Regional analysis of physical potential of timbe poduction in the Euopean Community. Xe Congess Foestie Mondial, 'La foet, Patimoine de l'aveni, Pais, Sept. 1991, voulme 6, pp HESMER, H. and F.G. SCHROEDER, Waldzusammensetzung und Waldbehandlung in Niedesachsischen Tiefland westlich de Wese und in de Miinstechen Bucht bis zum Ende des 18. Jahhundets. Decheniana-Beihefte n. 11, Bonn, 304 pp. HOFACKER, W., Einfluss von Umweltfaktoen auf Etag und Mostqualitat de Rebe. Ein Beitag zu methodischen Exmittlung de optimalen Standotbedingungen im Weinbau. Dissetation, Univesitat Hohemheim, 126 pp.

115 HOUGH, M.N Agometeoological aspects of cops in the United Kingdom and Ieland. A eview fo suga beet, oilseed ape, peas, wheat, baley, oats, potatoes, apples and peas. Joint Reseach Cente, Commission of the Euopean Communities, EUR EN, Bussels-Luxemboug, 303 pp. IMENSON, A.C., H. DUMONT, A. EKONOMOU-AMILLI, S. STAMATIS and L. SEKLIZIOTIS, Impact analysis of climatic change in the Mediteanean egion. Euopean wokshop on inteelated bioclimatic and land use changes. Noodwijkehout, Nethelands. Vol. F. Jooss~, M.R., Pesonal communication based on: Kwantitatieve opbengsten van appel en pee by J. Goedegebue. Wilhelminadop, the Nethelands. KLENERT, M., Kiinstliche Vekdeung de meteoologischen Vehiiltnisse im Rebestand und ihe Auswikung auf den Etag und die Fuchtbakeit de Rebe sowie das Wachstum de Taubenbeeen. Dissetation, Justus Liebig-Unvesitat, Giessen, 132 pp. KONING, G.H.J. DE, C.A. VAN DIEPEN, C.A., G.J. REINDS, J.D. BULENS and H.A.J. VAN LANEN, van (in pep). Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. N. Potential, wate-limited and actual cop poduction. WRR Technical Woking Document, The Hague. KRONENBERG, H.G., Apple gowing potentials in Euope. 3. Nothen limits. Neth. J. of Agic. Sci. 37: LANEN, H.A.J., VAN (1991). Qualitative and quantitative physical land evaluation: An opeational appoach. PhD Thesis, Agicultual Univesity, Wageningen. LANEN, H.A.J., VAN, and F.A. WOPEREIS, (in pep.). Compute-captued expet knowledge to evaluate possibilities fo injection of sluy fom animal manue in the Nethelands. Geodema. LANEN, H.A.J. VAN, J. BOUMA and Y. VAN RANDEN, Mixed qualitativelquantitative land evaluation methodology applied to the EC Soil Map. Step I: selection of potentially favouable aeas. In: H.A.J. van Lanen and A.K. Begt (Eds.). Poc. of CEC-wokshop on 'Application of computeized EC soil map and climate data'. EUR Repot 12039, Luxemboug. pp LANEN, H. A.J. VAN, C. A. VAN DIEPEN, G.J. REINDS, G.H.J. DE KONLNG, J.D. BULENS and A.K. VAN BREGT, (in pep. a). Physical land evaluation methods and GIs to exploe cop gowth potential and its effects within the Euopean Communities. Agicultual Systems. LANEN, H. A.J. VAN, C. A. VAN DIEPEN, G.J. REINDS and G.H. J. DE KONING, (in pep. b). Compaison of Qualitative and Quantitative Physical Land Evaluation using the Assessment of the Suga Beet Gowing Potential of the Euopean Communities. Soil Use and Management.

116 LANEN, H.A.J. VAN, M.J.D. HACK-TEN BROEKE, J. BOUMA, and W.J.M. DE GROOT, (in pep. c). A mixed qualitativelquantitative physical methodology. Geodema. LINDER, S., R.E. MCMURTRIE and J.J. LANDSBERG, Gowth of Eucalypts: a mathematical model applied to Eucalyptus globulus. In: P.M.A. Tigestedt, P. Puttonen and V. Kosk (eds.) Cop physiology of foest tees. Univesity of Helsinki, Finland, 336 pp. LIONAKIS, S.M., Topical and subtopical fuit tees in Geece. In: Fae, J.M. and Monasta, F. (Eds.). Poc. of Wokshop on 'Cultues topicales et subtopicales pou les egions mediteanees'. EUR Repot 11922, Luxemboug. pg MAYER, H., Waldbau auf soziologisch-okologische Gundlage. Gustav Fische Velag, Stuttgat-New Yok, 514 pp. MOHRMANN, J.C.J., and J. KESSLER, Wate deficiences in Euopean agicultue. A climatological suvey. ILRI publication no. 5, Wageningen. 60 pp. ORPHANOS, P.I., V.D. KRENTOS and P.A. LOIZIDES, Effects of N, P and K fetilizing and sheep manue on yield and quality of Valencia oanges. Min. of Agic. and Nat, Res., Nicosia, Cypus. Miscellaneous epots pp. PAPADAKIS, J., Geogafia Agicola Mundial. Salvat Editoos s.a. Bacelona. PAPADAKIS, J., Agicultual potentialities of wold climates. Buenos Aies, Agentina. PAPADAKIS, J., Climates of the wold and thei potentialities. Buenos Aies, Agentina. PENFOLD, A.R. and J.L. WILLIS, The Eucalypts. Leonad Hill Books Limited, London, Intescience publishes inc. New Yok, 550 pp. REINDS, G.J. and H.A.J. VAN LANEN, (in pep.). Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. 11: A physical land evaluation pocedue. WRR Technical Woking Document, The Hague, 28 pp. REINDS G.J., G.H.J. DE KONING and J.D. BULENS, (in pep.). Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities Soils, climate and administative egions. WRR Technical Woking Document, The Hague, 39 pp. ROSA, D. DE LA, and J.M. MOREIRA, Evaluation Ecologica de Recusos Natuales de Andalucia. Sew. de Eval. Rec. Nat., AMA, Juntade Andalucia. Sevilla, 192 pp. ROSSITER, D.G., ALES: a micocompute pogam to assist in land evaluation. In: J. Bouma and A.K. Begt (Eds.). Poc. of symposium on 'Land qualities in space and time'. Pudoc, Wageningen. pp

117 Ross~R, D.G., ALES: a famewok fo land evaluation using a micocompute. Soil Use and Management 6: RossmER, D.G. and A.R. VAN WAMBEKE, ALES, Automated Land Evaluation System. Ales Vesion 2.2 Use's Manual, Septembe Depatment of Agonomy, Conell Univesity, Ithaca, New Yok, USA. SCHUT~, P., K.J. LANG and H.J. SCHUCK, Nadelholze in Mitteleuopa. Gustav Fische Velag Stuttgat-New Yok, 274 pp. SKELTON, S., Gapes. Weatheing a poo season. The Gowe, 109 (11): 33. SYS, C., Land evaluation. Repot of the State Univesity of Ghent, Belgium. 352 pp. THRAN, P. and S. BROEKHUIZEN, Ago-climatic atlas of Euope. Pudoc. Wageningen. TRANQUILLINI, W., (ed.) Physiological Ecology of the Alpine Timbeline. Ecological studies Vol. 31. Spinge-Velag, Belin-Heidelbeg-New Yok, 137 pp. WAGENMAKERS, P.S., Plantdichtheid en angschikking gootfiuit (PFW 73), lichthuishouding in intensieve beplantingen (PFW 74) en snoei en boomvom (PFW 83). In: Jaaveslag Poefstation voo de Fuitteelt. Wilhelminadop. (in Dutch). WAGENMAKERS, P.S., Plantdichtheid en angschikking gootfuit (PFW 73), lichthuishouding in intensieve beplantingen (PFW 74) en snoei en boomvom (PFW 83). In: Jaaveslag Poefstation voo de Fuitteelt. Wilhelminadop. (in Dutch). WAGENMAKERS, P.S., Plantdichtheid en angschikking gootfiuit (PFW 73), lichthuishouding in intensieve beplantingen (PFW 74) en snoei en boomvom (PFW 83). In: Jaaveslag Poefstation voo de Fuitteelt. Wilhelminadop. (in Dutch). WAGENMAKERS, P.S., Plantdichtheid en angschikking gootfuit (PFW 73), lichthuishouding in intensieve beplantingen (PFW 74) en snoei en boomvom (PFW 83). In: Jaaveslag Poefstation voo de Fuitteelt. Wilhelminadop. (in Dutch). WEERT, R. VAN, K.J. LENSELINK and D.H. VAN SLOTEN, Opbengst van citus in elatie tot bodemvocht. Landbouwpoefstation Suiname. Bulletin no. 90. (in Dutch). WOOD, S.R. and FJ. DENT, LECS: A land evaluation compute system. Manual 5: Methodology. Ministy of Agicultue, Bogo, Indonesia.

118 APPENDIX 1 LIST OF WORKING DOCUMENTS OF PROJECT ON 'PRODUCTION POTENTIAL OF RURAL AREAS WITHIN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES' 1 Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. I: GIs and data model. J.D. Bulens and A.K. Begt 2 Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. 11: A physical land evaluation pocedue. G.J. Reinds and H.A.J. van Lanen 3 Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. 111: Soils, climate and administative egions. G.J. Reinds, G.H.J. de Koning and J.D. Bulens 4 Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. IV: Potential, wate-limited and actual cop poduction. G.H.J. de Koning, C.A. van Diepen, G.J. Reinds, J.D. Bulens and H.A.J. van Lanen. 5 Cop poduction potential of ual aeas within the Euopean Communities. V: Qualitative suitability assessment fo foesty and fuit cops. H.A.J. van Lanen, C.M.A. Hendiks and J.D. Bulens.

119 APPENDIX 2 LAND CHARACTERISTICS DERIVED FROM THE EC SOIL MAP Land chaacteistic: alkalinity level code desciption absent pesent (Sodium Satuation ate >IS%) Land chaacteistic: base satuation level code desciption low (40%) medium (50-99%) high (100%) Land chaacteistic: calcium cabonate level code desciption 1 a absent 2 P pesent Land chaacteistic: gy PSum level code desciption absent pesent Land chaacteistic: cation exchange capacity level code desciption 1 vl vey low (4 meq) 2 I low (5-15 meq) 3 m medium (15-30 meq) 4 h high (30-40 meq) 5 vh vey high (>40 meq) 6 P peat

120 Land chaacteistic: soil dainage level code desciption 1 VP vey poo 2 P poo 3 t P tempoaily poo 4 i impefect 5 mg modeately good 6 g good 7 ex excessive Land chaacteistic: oganic matte content (%) level code desciption 1 I humous ( %) 2 h ich (>2.0%) 3 P peat (>SO%) Land chaacteistic: phases; subdivisions of units level code desciption none gavelly; >35% gavels < 75 cm stony; >35% stones >75 cm lithic; had ock within 50 cm concetionay; ~35% con. petocalcic hoizon within 100 cm saline hoizon within 100 cm sodic hoizon within 100 cm Land chaacteistic: maximum ooting depth level code desciption 1 vsh vey shallow (<=lo cm) 2 sh shallow (10-40 cm) 3 mo modeate (40-60 cm) 4 mod modeately deep (60-80 cm) 5 d deep ( cm) 6 vd vey deep (>I20 cm)

121 Land chaacteistic: level code salinity desciption - 1 a absent 2 P pesent (EC > 4.0 mmhoslcm) Land chaacteistic: slope level code desciption 1 le 2 sl 3 most 4 st level (4%) sloping (8-15 %) modeately steep ( %) steep (>25%) Land chaacteistic: textue of topsoil (0-30 cm) level code desciption 1 c coase 2 m medium 3 m medium fine 4 f fine 5 v f vey fine 6 P peat

122 APPENDIX 3 LAND CHARACTERISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH CLIMATE Land chaacteistic: mean annual pecipitation deficit level code desciption Land chaacteistic: mean tempeatue July ("C) level code desciption 1 <9 foest-gowth impossible modeate foest-gowth 3 >11 foest-gowth possible Land chaacteistic: mean maximum tempeatue of six wamest months level code desciption Land chaacteistic: aveage minimum tempeatue of coldest month level code desciption

123 Land chaacteistic: numbe of months with optimum mean tempeatue between 13OC and 30 C level code desciption 1 c5 c5 months 2 >5 >= 5 months Land chaacteistic: mean annual tempeatue level code desciption Land chaacteistic: Summe ainfall (Apil-Septembe) level code desciption 1 c100 c100 mm mm mm mm mm 6 >SO0.>SO0 mm Land chaacteistic: August ainfall level code desciption Land chaacteistic: numbe of ain days pe month level code desciption <5 days 5-10 days >=I0 days

124 APPENDIX 4 SUITABILITY OF NUTS-1 REGIONS FOR FAST GROWING TREE SPECIES NUTS-1 Code NUTS-1 Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bay en Saaland Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Es t Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) No Modeate Sevee Sevee limita- limita- bio- managetions tions physical ment limita- limitations tions

125 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland No Modeate Sevee Sevee limita- limita- bio- managetions tions physical ment limita- limitations tions Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (EastandS.is1) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente Sud do Continente

126 APPENDIX 5 SUITABILITY OFNUTS-1 REGIONS FOR NORMAL GROWING MORE DEMANDING TREE SPECIES NUTS-1 NUTS-1 No Modeate Sevee Sevee Code Desciption limita- limita- bio- managetions tions physical ment limita- limitations tions Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bayen Saaland Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Es t Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel

127 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland No Modeate Sevee Sevee limita- limita- bio- managetions tions physical ment limita- limitations tions Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (EastandS.is1) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente Suddo Continente

128 APPENDIX 6 SUITABILITY OF NUTS-1 REGIONS FOR NORMAL GROWING LESS DEMANDING TREE SPECIES NUTS-1 NUTS-1 No Modeate Sevee Sevee Code Desciption limita- limita- bio- managetions tions physical ment limita- limitations tions Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bay en Saaland Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pasde-Calais Es t Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel

129 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 No Modeate Sevee Sevee Code Desciption limita- limita- bio- managetions tions physical ment limita- limitations tions Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (EastandSkl) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente Sud do Continente

130 APPENDIX 7 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR FAST GROWING TREE SPECIES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR FAST GROWING TREE SPECIES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo fast fo othe land gowing cops tee species 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna g c g c g c g c e o e o e o e o a o a, o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c 1 c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S

131 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo fast fo othe land gowing cops tee species 41 Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales A Scotland B Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. isl) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c 1 c s s s s P P P P s S S S

132 APPENDIX 8 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR NORMAL GROWING MORE DEMANDING TREE SPECIES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUABLE FOR NORMAL GROWING MORE DEMANDING TREE SPECIES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo nomal fo othe land gowing cops moe demanding tee species 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a 1 c I c I c 1 c s s s s P P P P S S S S

133 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo nomal fo othe land gowing cops moe demanding tee species g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S 36 Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud A Sicilia B Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales A Scotland B Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. isl)

134 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo nomal fo otheland gowing cops moe demanding tee species g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a 1 c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente

135 APPENDIX 9 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR NORMAL GROWING LESS DEMANDING TREE SPECIES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR NORMAL GROWING LESS DEMANDING TREE SPECIES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo nomal fo othe land gowing cops less demanding tee species 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 IIe de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pasde-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P S S S P s

136 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo nomal fo othe land gowing cops less demanding tee species 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna 41 Nood-Nedeland 42 Oost-Nedeland 45 Zuid-Nedeland 47 West-Nedeland 51 Vlaams gewest 52 Region Wallonne 53 Bussel 60 Luxemboug (G.D.) g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S Noth 72 Yokshie & Humbeside 73 East Midlands 74 East Anglia 75 South East 76 South West 77 West Midlands 78 Noth West 79 Wales 7A Scotland 7B Nothen Ieland 80 Ieland 90 Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. id)

137 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo nomal fo othe land gowing cops less demanding tee species - B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento BS Este B6 Su g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S s S C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente

138 APPENDIX 10 SUITABILITY OF NUTS-1 REGIONS FOR RAINFED FRUIT TREES NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bayen Saaland Belin (West) No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Es t Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.)

139 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 No Modeate Sevee Code Desciption limita- limita- limitations tions tions Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (East and S. isl) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Es te Su Note do continente Sud do Continente

140 APPENDIX 11 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR RAINFED FRUIT TREES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR RAINFED FRUIT TREES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive. only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo ainfed fo othe land fuit cops g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c 1 c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna

141 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo ainfed fo othe land fuit cops c e g o c e g o c e g o c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S s S 41 Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales A Scotland B Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) ' A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. isl) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente

142 APPENDIX 12 SUITABILITY OF NUTS-1 REGIONS FOR IRRIGATED FRUIT TREES NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bayen Saaland Belin (West) No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Est Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.)

143 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 No Modeate Sevee Code Desciption limita- limita- limitations tions tions Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland Ieland 12 Danmak 7 Ellas (Noth) 7 Ellas (Cental) 5 Ellas (Eastand S. isl) 2 Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente 1 Sud do Continente 4

144 APPENDIX 13 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR IRRIGATED FRUIT TREES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR IRRIGATED FRUIT TREES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo iigated fo othe land fuit cops 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna g c e o g. c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S

145 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo iigated fo othe land fuit cops 41 Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales A Scotland B Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. is]) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a 1 c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S

146 APPENDIX 14 SUITABILITY OF NUTS-1 REGIONS FOR RAINFED ClTRUS NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bayen Saaland Belin (West) No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Est Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.)

147 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (East and S. isl) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente Sud do Continente

148 APPENDIX 15 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR RAINFED CITRUS AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (9% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR RAINFED CITRUS OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo ainfed fo othe land citus cops 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien ~od-p&-de-~alais Est Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a. o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I - c I c I c S s s s P P P P s S s S

149 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo ainfed fo othe land citus cops g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o, a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S 41 Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales A Scotland B Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) '7.3. A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. id) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente

150 APPENDIX 16 SUITABILITY OF NUTS- 1 REGIONS FOR IRRIGATED CITRUS NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bayen Saaland Belin (West) No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Est Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Ab uzzi-molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxem bug (G.D.)

151 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption tions No limitations Modeate limitations Sevee limita- Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (East and S. isl) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente Sud do Continente

152 APPENDIX 17 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR IRRIGATED CITRUS AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR IRRIGATED CITRUS OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo iigated fo othe land citus cops 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e s a s a s a s a t I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P S S S P s

153 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo iigated fo othe land citus cops g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S 41 Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales A Scotland B Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. isl) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente

154 APPENDIX 18 SUITABILITY OF NUTS- 1 REGIONS FOR THE CULTIVATION OF OLIVES IN A LOW INPUT PRODUCTION SYSTEM NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bayen Saaland Belin (West) No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Es t Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Moliie Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.)

155 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland Ieland 0 Danmak 0 Ellas (Noth) 5 Ellas (Cental) 5 Ellas (East and S. isl) 10 Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente 3 Sud do Continente 17

156 APPENDIX 19 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR OLIVES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR OLIVES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES; CULTIVATION OF OLIVES IN A LOW INPUT PRODUCTION SYSTEM NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo olives; fo othe land low input cops '11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P ' S S S P s

157 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo olives; fo othe land low input cops 41 Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams.gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.) Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales A Scotland B Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. isl) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S

158 APPENDIX 20 SUITABILITY OF NUTS-1 REGIONS FOR THE CULTIVATION OF OLIVES IN A HIGH INPUT PRODUCTION SYSTEM NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bayen Saaland Belin (West) No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Es t Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadegna Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.)

159 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland No Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limitations tions tions Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (East and S. isl) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente Sud do Continente

160 APPENDIX 21 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR OLIVES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR OLIVES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES; CULTIVATION OF OLIVES IN A HIGH INPUT PRODUCTION SYSTEM NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo olives; fo othe land high input cops - 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P S S S P s

161 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo olives; fo othe land high input cops 41 Nood-Nedeland 42 Oost-Nedeland 45 Zuid-Nedeland 47 West-Nedeland 51 Vlaams gewest 52 Region Wallonne 53 Bussel 60 Luxemboug (G.D.) 71 Noth 72 Yokshie & Humbeside 73 East Midlands 74 East Anglia 75 South East 76 South West 77 West Midlands 78 Noth West 79 Wales 7A Scotland 7B Nothen Ieland 80 Ieland 90 Danmak A1 Eilas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. isl) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S

162 APPENDIX 22 SUITABILITY OF NUTS-1 REGIONS FOR RAINFED CULTIVATION OF GRAPES NUTS-1 NUTS-1 Code Desciption Schleswig-Holstein Hambug Niedesachsen Bemen Nodhein-Westfalen Hessen Rheinland-Pfalz Baden-Wuttembeg Bay en Saaland Belin (West) No Slight Modeate Sevee limita- limita- limita- limitations tions tions tions Ile de Fance Bassin Paisien Nod-Pas-de-Calais Es t Ouest Sud-Ouest Cente-Est Mediteanee Nod-Ovest Lombadia Nod-Est Emilia-Romagna Cento Lazio Campania Abuzzi-Molise Sud Sicilia Sadeg na Nood-Nedeland Oost-Nedeland Zuid-Nedeland West-Nedeland Vlaams gewest Region Wallonne Bussel Luxemboug (G.D.)

163 NUTS-1 NUTS-1 No Slight Modeate Sevee Code Desciption limita- limita- limita- limitations tions tions tions Noth Yokshie & Humbeside East Midlands East Anglia South East South West West Midlands Noth West Wales Scotland Nothen Ieland Ieland Danmak Ellas (Noth) Ellas (Cental) Ellas (East and S. isl) Nooeste Noeste Madid Cento Este Su Note do continente Sud do Continente

164 APPENDIX 23 COMPETITIVE LAND, COMMON UNSUITABLE LAND FOR RAINFED GROWING OF GRAPES AND SOME OTHER CROP TYPES IN THE NUTS-1 REGIONS (% OF AREA OF NUTS-1 REGION) AS WELL AS LAND ONLY SUITABLE FOR GRAPES OR ONE OF THE OTHER CROP TYPES NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo gapes fo othe land cops 11 Schleswig-Holstein 12 Hambug 13 Niedesachsen 14 Bemen 15 Nodhein-Westfalen 16 Hessen 17 Rheinland-Pfalz 18 Baden-Wuttembeg 19 Bayen 1A Saaland 21 Ile de Fance 22 Bassin Paisien 23 Nod-Pas-de-Calais 24 Est 25 Ouest 26 Sud-Ouest 27 Cente-Est 28 Mediteanee 31 Nod-Ovest 32 Lombadia 33 Nod-Est 34 Emilia-Romagna 35 Cento 36 Lazio 37 Campania 38 Abuzzi-Molise 39 Sud 3A Sicilia 3B Sadegna g c g c g c g c e o e o e o e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c I c s s s s P P P P S S S S

165 NUTS-1 egion competitive only suitable only suitable unsuitable land fo gapes fo othe land cops 41 Nood-Nedeland 42 Oost-Nedeland 45 Zuid-Nedeland 47 West-Nedeland 51 Vlaams gewest 52 Region Wallonne 53 Bussel 60 Luxemboug (G.D.) 71 Noth 72 Yokshie & Humbeside 73 East Midlands 74 East Anglia 75 South East 76 South West 77 West Midlands 78 Noth West 79 Wales 7A Scotland 7B Nothen Ieland 80 Ieland 90 Danmak A1 Ellas (Noth) A2 Ellas (Cental) A3 Ellas (East and S. isl) B1 Nooeste B2 Noeste B3 Madid B4 Cento B5 Este B6 Su C1 Note do continente C2 Sud do Continente g c e o g c e o g c e o g c e o a o a o a o a o s e t s e t s e t s e t s a s a s a s a I c I c I c 1 c s s s s P P P P S S S S

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178