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

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources of Ethiopia (MoA) - Ethiopia

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

01/08/2003

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

Ja

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

an allignment of stone along the contour line which stabilzes with grass species

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Description: construction of stone bunds along the contour to reduce soil erosion, conserve moisture, decrease slope length, and to decrease down stream siltation. It is integrated with biological SWC measures and maintenance is made where ever necessary. The technique enhances the growth of natural grasses and improves the micro climate.

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:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

the introduced methods come from other areas

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): soil erosion, overgrazing and trampling, deforestation, decline of fertility and productivity, aridity, low soil moisture, free grazing

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): shortage of drinking water, shortage of forage and fuel wood, drought

Grazingland comments: cut and carry is allowed

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Water supply: Also mixed rainfed - irrigated

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 120Longest growing period from month to month: Jul - Oct

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• cross-slope measure

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 33.15 m2.

The spacing is wider. Unproper foundation and excavation is observed in some places

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Ha: aridification

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation, rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap

Secondary technical functions: reduction of slope length, increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, water harvesting / increase water supply, sediment retention / trapping, sediment harvesting

Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 100
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.8-1.5
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 15-20
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.3
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 4

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 12.00%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is (see figure below): 5.00%

Gradient along the rows / strips: 1.00%

Bund/ bank: level
Vertical interval between structures (m): 0.8-1.5m
Spacing between structures (m): 15-20m
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.70m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.2m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 50-60m

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 12%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is: 5%

Lateral gradient along the structure: 0%

Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Birr

Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:

8.0

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	area closure (leave for natural regeneration)	Vegetative	June-October
2.	survey and layout	Structural	December
3.	stone collection	Structural	January
4.	foundation excavation	Structural	Jan.-March
5.	construction	Structural	Jan.-March

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	110.0	110.0	83.0
Equipment	Animal traction	ha	1.0	15.0	15.0	83.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					125.0

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 60 month(s)

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	contour cultivation	Agronomic	January-June / 3-4 times
2.	repairing broken bund by placing more stones	Structural	Dec-Jan/annual

4.7 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	11.25	11.25	83.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					11.25

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: crowbar, hammer, hoe, spade, shovel, sprit level

length of structure (600m long soil bund is constructed per hectar)

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

construction materials (stone availabilty) and excavation of foundation could be difficult

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Slopes on average: Hilly and moderate. Also: Gentle

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 depth on average: Moderately deep. Also: Shallow and deep
Soil texture is medium. Also: Fine/heavy and coarse/light
Soil fertility is medium-low
Soil drainage/infiltration is medium. Also: poor and good
Soil water storage capacity is medium. Also: high and low

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 3% - 4%

5% of the land users are rich and own 5% of the land.
30% of the land users are average wealthy and own 30% of the land.
55% of the land users are poor and own 55% of the land.
10% of the land users are poor and own 10% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: daily labourer

Market orientation of production system: subsistence (self-supply), subsistence (self-supply), mixed (subsistence/ commercial

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology

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

Land ownership:

• state

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

Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

25000

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 10-50%

Comments:

83% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

20750 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: estimates

4250 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: they need some incentive

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
increase production How can they be sustained / enhanced? maintenance, stablize with biological SWC measures
enhancing spring development
increase animal feed

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
erosion control, moisture harvesting How can they be sustained / enhanced? maintenance, stablize with biological SWC measures
yield and forage production increased How can they be sustained / enhanced? maintenance, stablize with biological SWC measures, area closure and introduction of cut and carry system

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?
reduce cultivated land	widen the spacing between bunds
harbour rodants	integrate with biological SWC measures and take rodent control measures
labour intensive	incentives

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
labour intensive	provision of incentives
shortage of construction materials and hand tools	provision of hand tools
shortage of skilled man power	capacity building through training and field visit