1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Ngitili are traditional enclosures for in-situ conservation and rehabilitation of vegetation, practiced by the Wasukuma agropastoralists in Shinyanga, Tanzania.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Shinyanga is a semiarid area characterized by shortage of fodder associated with problems of deforestation, fuelwood scarcity, food insecurity, declining soil fertility, severe soil erosion and unsecure land use rights. Ngitili is a dry-season fodder reserve, an indigenous practice which has been revived by a government programme from 1986-2001. For initial regeneration of the vegetation and rehabilitation of denuded land absolute exclusion of up to 5 years is needed. Then, areas of standing vegetation are enclosed seasonally from the onset of the rainy season till the peak / end of dry season, before they are opened up for grazing. Two distinct vegetation strata are identifiable, an upper stratum dominated by trees and shrubs (Acacia tortilis, A. nilotica, A. polyacantha and A. seyal) and a lower stratum of grasses, herbs and forbs. Structure and composition of the ngitili areas are closely influenced by location, age, management practices and intensity of use. The reserves are established on degraded land and around homesteads. Individual plots usually reach 2-5 ha in size, while communal ngitili cover 10-200 ha. Mostly, the boundaries are not rigidly marked, and physical barriers are not established. Local guards and community by-laws are used to protect and enforce the system. Ngitili alleviates dry season fodder shortages and prevents land degradation, through reducing soil erosion and deforestation. The reserves provide a wide range of woodland goods - such as timber, fodder, fuelwood, medicinal herbs, wild fruits and honey. They help to enhance livelihoods, provide a vital safety net during dry seasons and droughts and generate additional income of up to US$ 500-1,000 per year and household. Ngitili greatly reduced women’s labour, cutting the time spent on fuelwood collection by over 80%, and have a highly positive impact on biodiversity

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

Comments (type of project, etc.):

an indigenous practice which has been revived by a government programme from 1986-2001

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): shortage of fodder associated with problems of deforestation, fuelwood scarcity, food insecurity, declining soil fertility, severe soil erosion and unsecure land use rights

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: Yes

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Mixed: Ms: Silvo-pastoralism

If land use has changed due to the implementation of the Technology, indicate land use before implementation of the Technology:

Grazing land: Ge: Extensive grazing land

3.3 Further information about land use

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• area closure (stop use, support restoration)
• pastoralism and grazing land management

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

Comments:

3000-5000 km2

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Type of vegetative measures: scattered / dispersed

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion, Et: loss of topsoil, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bq: quantity / biomass decline, Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: low

Technical knowledge required for land users: low

Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash, improvement of ground cover, stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of biomass (quantity), promotion of vegetation species and varieties (quality, eg palatable fodder)

Secondary technical functions: increase of infiltration

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs

Trees/ shrubs species: Acacia tortilis, A. nilotica, A. polyacantha and A. seyal

Major change in timing of activities: For initial regeneration of the vegetation and rehabilitation of denuded land absolute exclusion of up to 5 years is needed. Then, areas of standing vegetation are enclosed seasonally from the onset o

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Demarcation and closure of sites usually on degraded land around homesteads	Vegetative
2.	Total enclosure during up to 5 years for initial regeneration of vegetation (if land is degraded)	Vegetative
3.	Temporary demarcation of paddocks for specific periods for rotational grazing within ngitili (controlled by experienced elders; based on utilization level and fodder availability)	Vegetative
4.	Controlled pruning and thinning (for firewood and poles)	Vegetative

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Closure of ngitili area at onset of rainy season. No management during rainy season	Vegetative
2.	Open area for grazing in July or August, after the crop residues and fallow vegetation have been depleted	Vegetative
3.	Temporary demarcation of paddocks for specific periods for rotational grazing within ngitili (controlled by experienced elders; based on utilization level and fodder availability)	Vegetative
4.	Controlled pruning and thinning (for firewood and poles)	Vegetative

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil texture (topsoil): Vertic soils are very extensive covering 47% of all soil types in the region

Soil drainage / infiltration is medium - poor

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

Comments:

individual (cropland), individual/communal 50%/50% (grazing land)

Land ownership: communal / village, individual, not titled, individual, titled

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Comments:

Increased tolerance to climatic extremes (e.g. prolonged dry spells and droughts)

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• more than 50%

Comments:

Comments on adoption trend: 300’000-500’000 ha of woodland restored 1986-2001 (most of Ngitilis are individual, but area-wise half-half), over 800 villages; 60-70% of all households have Ngitilis

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Generates many production and ecological benefits at the same time

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Damage to livestock and crops caused by growing wildlife populations	outweighed by the benefits gained from ngitili (in most areas)
Increased local inequity: benefit gap between richer and poorer house¬holds (who have no ngitilis); growing sales of ngitilis	local institutions have to enable people to hold on to land and maintain ngitilis; allow poorer households to benefit from communal ngitilis
Scarcity of land, growing pressure (rising human and livestock populations); conflicts over grazing rights	encourage villages to establish by-laws for protecting ngitilis
Insecurity of tenure impedes establishment of ngitilis (individual and communal)	increase local people’s and groups ownership and control over their resources; clearly acknowledge in national law the secure tenure of both private and communal ngitili
Productivity could still be improved	introduction of improved fodder grasses. Planting of fast growing fodder trees and/or shrubs

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Kamwenda G.J. 2002. Ngitili agrosilvopastoral systems in the United Republic of Tanzania. Unasylva 211, Vol. 53, 2002.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

World Resource Institute. 2010. Regenerating Woodlands: Tanzania's HASHI Project. http://www.wri.org/publication/content/8108

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Equator initiative. 2010. Nomination Form Equator Initiative. http://www.equatorinitiative.org/knowledgebase/files/2002-0128_Nom_HASHI_Tanzania.pdf

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Blay D., E. Bonkoungou, S.A.O. Chamshama and B.Chikamai. 2004. Rehabilitation of Degraded Lands in Sub-Saharan Africa: Lessons Learned from Selected Case Studies. Forestry research network for Sub-Saharan Africa (fornessa)

Title, author, year, ISBN:

WRI (2005): World Resources 2005: The Wealth of the Poor—Managing Ecosystems to Fight Poverty. World Resources Institute (WRI) in collaboration with United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme, and World Bank