Women planting local grass species on a severely degraded hillside in a recently closed area. (Daniel Danano)

Area closure for rehabilitation (Ethiopia)

Meret mekelel

Description

Enclosing and protecting an area of degraded land from human use and animal interference, to permit natural rehabilitation, enhanced by additional vegetative and structural conservation measures.

Area closure involves the protection and resting of severely degraded land to restore its productive capacity. There are two major types of area enclosures practised in Ethiopia: (1) the most common type involves closing of an area from livestock and people so that natural regeneration of the vegetation can take place; (2) the second option comprises closing off degraded land while simultaneously implementing additional measures such as planting of seedlings, mulching and establishing water harvesting structures to enhance and speed up the regeneration process. The focus of this case study is on this second type.

The selection of measures chosen for rehabilitation depends mainly on the land use type, and to a lesser extent on climate, topography and soil type. Degraded croplands with individual land use rights are normally treated with additional structural measures to retain soil moisture and trap sediment, and with agronomic measures to restore soil fertility. Open access grazing lands are closed for natural regeneration while partly treated with additional measures, and open access woodlands are simply closed. In the case study area 60% of the enclosed area is under treatment with additional conservation measures and 40% is under natural regeneration. First, the area to be closed is demarcated and protected with fencing, usually live fences, and a site guard may be assigned to further ensure protection. Structural measures such as micro-basins, trenches, and bunds that enhance water infiltration and soil moisture may be constructed to increase survival rate of vegetative material planted. Hillside terraces, spaced at a 1 m vertical interval with a width of 1 m are constructed on steep slopes (exceeding 20%). Nitrogen-fixing and multipurpose shrubs/trees (for fodder, fuel) such as Acacia saligna, Sesbania sesban, Leucaena leucocephala as well as local grass species such as napier (Pennisetum purpureum) and rhodes (Chloris gayana) are planted as additional measures for conservation.

The maintenance of area enclosures involves activities such as replanting, maintaining of fences, pruning of trees and weeding. After one year, cut-and-carry of grass for stall-feeding can be partly practiced - which is of economic benefit to the farmers. Rehabilitation normally takes about 7-10 years depending on the level of degradation and intensity of management. Land use is limited to selective cutting of trees, collection of dead wood and cut-and-carry of grass for livestock fodder. On individually owned enclosures land users start cutting trees after three years (for eucalyptus) and after 7–8 years (for other trees), while on communal land farmers are allowed to collect dead wood after 3-–4 years, and the community decides about the use of trees.

Location

Location: Bilate River Catchment (Rift Valley), Alaba, South Ethiopia, Ethiopia

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 38.0813, 7.3137

Spread of the Technology:

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation:

Type of introduction
Structural measures in the enclosed area, such as stone and earth bunds, speed up the rehabilitation process: they improve soil moisture and thus facilitate growth of natural vegetation or planted seedlings. (Daniel Danano)
-

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use
Land use mixed within the same land unit: Ja - Silvo-pastoralism

  • Cropland
    • Perennial (non-woody) cropping
    • Tree and shrub cropping
  • Grazing land
    • Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by water - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion, Wg: gully erosion/ gullying, Wo: offsite degradation effects
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
  • biological degradation - Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline
SLM group
  • area closure (stop use, support restoration)
  • cross-slope measure
SLM measures

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Rehabilitation of degraded land based on enclosure with live fence. Natural regeneration of vegetative cover is supported by water harvesting structures and planting of nitrogen-fixing/multipurpose shrubs and trees as well as local grass species. On steeper slopes hillside terraces may be established.

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: improvement of ground cover, increase of infiltration, control of dispersed runoff, control of concentrated runoff, increase in soil fertility

Secondary technical functions: increase / maintain water stored in soil, less sediment deportation

Mulching
Material/ species: tree leaves/grass

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs

Vegetative measure: oversowing grasses
Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Trees/ shrubs species: Acacia saligna, Sesbania sesban, Leucaena leucocephala, Eucalyptus spp., Grevillea robusta

Grass species: nepier (Pennisetum purpureum), rhodes (Chloris gayana)

Structural measure: micro-basins (opt.)

Structural measure: terraces (opt.)

Structural measure: bunds (opt.)

Other type of management: land use change, enclosure,, cut-and-carry
Author: Mats Gurtner

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: n.a.
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = n.a
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: n.a
Most important factors affecting the costs
n.a.
Establishment activities
  1. Planting of trees (Eucalyptus spp., Grevillea robusta) as well as (Timing/ frequency: (early rainy season).)
  2. Oversowing/interplanting with local grass species: napier grass (Timing/ frequency: (early rainy season).)
  3. Marking the boundary and establishment of live fences: digging pits (Timing/ frequency: early rainy season (before June).)
  4. Construction of structural measures such as micro- basins, trenches, bunds or hillside terraces. (Timing/ frequency: before rains)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (n.a.) Total costs per input (n.a.) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour ha 1.0 175.0 175.0 50.0
Equipment
Tools ha 1.0 25.0 25.0 100.0
Plant material
Seeds ha 1.0 40.0 40.0
Seedlings ha 1.0 150.0 150.0
Construction material
Stone ha 1.0
Wood ha 1.0
Other
site guard (kg grain/ha/year) ha 1.0 1.0 1.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 391.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 391.0
Maintenance activities
  1. Mulching with tree leaves/grass around newly planted trees, before (Timing/ frequency: before rains / initial establishment)
  2. Replanting/gapping up live fence and trees during rains in the early (Timing/ frequency: during rains /)
  3. Harvesting grass (Timing/ frequency: during rainy season. /)
  4. Pruning of trees (Timing/ frequency: in the dry season. /)
  5. Weeding (Timing/ frequency: after rains. /)
  6. Repairing breaks in structures (Timing/ frequency: before rains./)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (n.a.) Total costs per input (n.a.) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour ha 1.0 35.0 35.0 100.0
Equipment
Tools ha 1.0 5.0 5.0 100.0
Plant material
Seeds ha 1.0 10.0 10.0
Seedlings ha 1.0 40.0 40.0
Other
site guard (kg grain/ha/year) ha 1.0 1.0 1.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 91.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 91.0

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
751-1,000 mm (ranked 1)
1,001-1,500 mm (ranked 2)
Thermal climate class: tropics
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
fodder production
decreased
increased


(cut-and-carry of grass)

fodder quality
decreased
increased


(cut-and-carry of grass)

wood production
decreased
increased

production area (new land under cultivation/ use)
decreased
increased


Reduction of grazing area leads to high pressure on remaining grazing areas

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
decreased

farm income
decreased
increased


(selling grass/wood)

workload
increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts
community institutions
weakened
strengthened

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
improved

conflict mitigation
worsened
improved


Unequal share of benefits, some illegal cutting of vegetation is involved

Ecological impacts
excess water drainage
reduced
improved

soil moisture
decreased
increased


>50%

soil cover
reduced
improved


>80%

soil loss
increased
decreased


initially 50% reduction, after 2–3 years

Soil fertility
decreased
increased


increased organic matter, nitrogen fixing shrubs

Biodiversity
decreased
increased


recovering disappearing local species

competition between (grass)species
increased
decreased


competition between naturally regenerating and oversown (grass)species

Off-site impacts
reliable and stable stream flows in dry season (incl. low flows)
reduced
increased


Also groundwater recharge

downstream flooding (undesired)
increased
reduced

downstream siltation
increased
decreased


Less sediment transported

groundwater/ river pollution
increased
reduced

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Climate change

-

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Reduction of on-site and off-site land degradation, reclamation of degraded non-productive land (regenerating fertility)

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Strengthen maintenance and protection to increase biomass production of enclosure.
  • Fodder shortage is reduced through cut-and-carry of grass in enclosures (after 1 year)

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Introduce more productive and nutritious grass/legume species.
  • Collection of dead wood from enclosures (after 3–4 years) mitigates fuelwood shortage

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Introduce alternative fast growing multi-purpose
    tree species such as Grevillea robusta (fodder for smallstock in very dry periods).
  • Cutting wood for construction of houses and wooden farm implements (after 7–8 years)

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Continue planting of multipurpose trees.
  • Increased honey production through increased bee activity in enclosures


    Emerge of springs, which have disappeared due to deforestation/land degradation


    Income generation: farmers sell grass/wood collected from area enclosures; they make profit despite seven years enclosure

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Improve beehives, ‘bee feed’ (bee-friendly plants), and access to market.


    Maintain proper ground cover to improve infiltration and percolation of rainwater.


    Better management of planted grass, making of hay, improve market systems.
  • Emergence of springs, which have disappeared due to deforestation/land degradation -> Maintain proper ground cover to improve infiltration and percolation of rainwater. - Income generation: farmers sell grass/wood collected from area enclosures; they make profit despite seven years enclosure -> Better management of planted grass, making of hay, improve market systems. Editors’ comments: Protecting degraded land against grazing is a common practice worldwide. In Ethiopia it is the second most important SWC practice after structural conservation measures. About 1.2 million hectares of degraded lands have been closed for rehabilitation in Ethiopia during the past three decades. As this case study shows, results are encouraging both in terms of effective protection and enhanced production. Land use rights: open access on woodlands and grazing lands (communal land use rights), individual on cropland
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • On highly eroded areas and in areas with low rainfall the survival rate of trees and shrubs is low and as a result the benefits only come after a very long period. This situation becomes unacceptable to the land users Select suitable local and exotic multipurpose tree/shrub species adapted
    to the local conditions (Acacia spp., Eucalyptus spp., Grevillea robusta etc). Construct water-harvesting structures (trenches, micro-basins). Raise awareness among land users through meetings and training.
  • Investment costs are rather high for land users Credits, loans, cooperatives.
  • Inequitable share of benefits Awareness should be increased through enhancing the LLPP approach.

References

Compiler
  • Daniel Danano
Editors
Reviewer
  • Fabian Ottiger
  • Donia Mühlematter
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Mei 29, 2011
Last update: Sept. 9, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Chadokar PA: Multipurpose Plant Species for Soil and Water Conservation. Assistance to Soil and Water ConservationProgramme. ETH/81/003. 1985.:
  • Betru Nedassa: Biological Soil Conservation Measures. Land Rehabilitation and Reforestation Project. Project 2488MOA/WFP. 1995.:
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International