Browsing by Subject "kipsi"
Now showing items 1-2 of 2
-
(2023)The external nutrient load of the Archipelago Sea weakens the state of the sea. Gypsum is applied to fields in the catchment area because it has been found to reduce phosphorus leaching from fields. Gypsum treatment of fields is organised by the the Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (ELY) of Southwest Finland through "KIPSI-hanke" (GYPSUM Project). Participation in gypsum treatment is free of charge for farmers. To achieve water protection objectives, more farmers in the area should participate in gypsum treatment. I study what factors that influence the participation of farmers in the catchment area in gypsum treatment of their fields. The underlying motivation for this study was to promote gypsum treatment of fields and improve the state of the Archipelago Sea. My research is a qualitative interview study. My interview data consists of nine farmer interviews. In my analysis, I also use scientific and social research literature and other sources. I compare the interviewees' perceptions of the effects of gypsum with the information presented in the natural science literature. On the other hand, I will unpack social phenomena and events that affect farmers' perception of gypsum treatment and their activities. According to my observations, farmers' participation is influenced by knowledge about gypsum treatment, or the lack of thereof. Also, farmers' perceptions of the effects of gypsum treatment affect their participation decisions. Yield and yield impacts are at the heart when a farmer decides on participation in gypsum treatment, even though gypsum treatment is free of charge for the farmer. Based on my results, farmers' participation in gypsum treatment of their fields is promoted by available solid, experience based, research data on effects of gypsum, especially on the effects on yields. Agricultural advice also proved to be a factor influencing participation in gypsum treatment. At least some farmers would receive information on gypsum treatment of fields as part of other agricultural advice. According to my research, agricultural advisors' knowledge of the effects of gypsum was variable and partly incomplete. According to my research, expert and active gypsum advice would promote participation in gypsum treatment. The historical tensions between rural and urban areas, as well as tension between the implementors and targets of environmental projects, have an impact on farmers' attitudes towards the KIPSI-hanke. From the point of view of the rural population, unjust and top-down environmental projects will also hamper future projects if the design of projects does not consider the involvement of the rural population as participants of the projects, not only as targets of measures.
-
(2020)The River Vantaa Gypsum Project’s (2018–2020) effects on fish stock were studied in a total of six different research areas in the Lepsämä River and the Luhtajoki River in Nurmijärvi. Two reference areas unaffected by the gypsum-treated fields and four downstream impact areas were selected as research areas. The goal was to examine the status of the local fish stock and its possible changes in the impact areas by electrofishing and the suitability of water quality for the reproduction of brown trout by incubating eggs in situ. These results were compared with those of the reference areas. Electrofishing was conducted in the autumn of 2018 prior to the gypsum treatment and was repeated the following autumn. The results of 2019 and 2018 were compared with each other and the changes in the status of the fish stock in the reference and impact areas were also compared in order to take into account the natural variation between years. The brown trout eggs were incubated from autumn 2018 to spring 2019. The water quality of the rivers was monitored at the same time and particular attention was given to the sulphate concentrations in the river during the incubation. Based on the electrofishing results, gypsum treatment had no observable effects on the fish stocks. The results improved in both the reference and impact areas in the latter year. The natural reproduction of brown trout was also found to have been successful in the impact areas. In the incubation experiment, the survival rate was approximately the same in the reference areas and the impact areas. Survival to hatching was slightly better in the control areas. However, no statistically significant difference was observed. Environmental variables had a significant effect on the test results, and there was a large dispersion both between and within the study areas. According to the results, water quality is suitable for brown trout reproduction even after gypsum treatment. The measured and estimated sulphate concentrations in river waters during the studies were well below the limits established in scientific studies. The results show that the sulphate concentrations and reduced water turbidity did not affect the fish stocks. The results did not reveal gypsum treatments having any effects on fish stocks. According to this and previous studies, it seems very likely that gypsum treatment does not have a significant effect on fish stocks in rivers or on brown trout reproduction. However, the results do not exclude all possible local effects, temporary or long-term, that gypsum treatments might have, especially when the treated areas are larger. A more detailed impact assessment would require further research.
Now showing items 1-2 of 2