Resource information
The objective of this paper is to present a way of complementing empirical results with farmers' perceptions in defining limiting biophysical land properties in a land suitability evaluation using the FAO framework methodology. The farmers' perceptions were identified using rapid and participatory rural appraisal (RRA/PRA) tools. The study catchment, having a semiarid continental climate and located on the Loess Plateau in northern China, covered an area of 3.5 km2. Most of the land users were dependent on subsistence agriculture. There were important topographic variations in the catchment and arable cropping on steep slopes brought about degradation of land due to water erosion. The biophysical monitoring, soil survey and RRA/PRA survey, carried out one year prior to the present investigation, supplied the data needed for identification of preliminary limiting land properties and land evaluation units. The land properties that needed further investigation in the present study were slope aspect, soil workability, flooding hazard and farmers' criteria on choice of land-use type. The farmers were able to give a comprehensive picture of the spatial and temporal variation and the importance for land-use options of the land properties concerned, and thereby complement the information gained from empirical results (measurements). In order to guarantee good production for dry as well as wet years, both south- and north-facing sites were chosen for most crops, and the slope aspect did not need to be differentiated in the final land suitability evaluation for arable crops. Grassland, however, was considered to be more suitable than woodland on south-facing sites. Hard soil layers were found to be important, since they affected soil workability and erosion negatively, giving slightly reduced suitability for the land units in which they occurred. Flooding events affecting crops on alluvial soils negatively were considered to occur once every 5 to 10 years, which is considered to be a low rate, so this property was therefore not included in the final suitability evaluation.
