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, Animal Industry, and Fisheries of Uganda (MAAIF) - Uganda

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

18/04/2000

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:

This is a system of integrated runoff water and drainage management that allows cultivation in a swampy valley bottom.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Setting up the infrastructure involves dividing the land in the valley into raised beds of ±10 m x 20 m which are separated by furrows, acting as drainage channels. Below the furrows is a pond. These furrows, however, can also fulfil the opposite role – distributing runoff water from upslope in the valley bottom if required. A diversion channel has been constructed to guide runoff from a track towards the valley. The channel is 0.5 m deep, 1 m wide, over 100 m in length and with a gradient of 0.5% - 1.0%. It is estimated that the ratio of catchment to cultivated area is 10:1. The channel is left open to divert runoff in times of shortage (though, naturally, as with any rainwater harvesting system, there has to be rain locally before it can be harvested). This water then can be held by the furrows whose outlet can be blocked. Citrus fruits (oranges) and mangoes are planted on the beds, and intercropped with annuals.

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose is production of cash crops, based on reclamation of land and control of concentrated runoff. The impact is achieved through a flexible method
of drainage/water harvesting, which helps ensure suitable moisture conditions for growth.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The main maintenance aspect is clearing inlets, channels and removing vegetation, using common household hand tools such as spades and hoes.

Natural / human environment: The technology is situated in a valley near a swamp. It consists of growing both annual and perennial crops throught the year. The farm is located in a semi-arid area. The soil is sandy loam and shallow.

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:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

an adoption from another district by the landuser but with a lot of modifications and technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): the major land use problem in the area are cutting down of trees, burning of bushes lack of crop roatation and water and soil conservation methods.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): continous cultivation leading to low yields lack of soil and water conservation methods eg ploughing across the slope

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)
• water diversion and drainage
• surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:

• 1-10 km2

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 5 m2.

the area under the technology reported covers farmers in one parish which approximates 5 km2

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Sketch of the runoff harvesting system

Uganda

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: increase / maintain water stored in soil

Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover, water harvesting

Structural measure: diversion ditch/cut-off drain
Spacing between structures (m): 10
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.45
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 140

Construction material (earth): soil dug out to make channel and ditches

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 2.00%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is: 1.00%

Lateral gradient along the structure: 1.00%

For water harvesting: the ratio between the area where the harvested water is applied and the total area from which water is collected is: 1:10.00

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Uganda shillings

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

1000.0

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	ploughing, 2nd plough, diving the blocks, digging	Structural	dry season

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	270.0	270.0	100.0
Equipment	Tools	ha	1.0	42.0	42.0	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	ha	1.0	23.0	23.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Compost manure	ha	1.0	10.0	10.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					345.0

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 60 month(s)

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	cleaning inlets	Structural	during rains/each cropping season
2.	cleaning channels	Structural	during rains/each cropping season

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	340.0	340.0	100.0
Equipment	Tools	ha	1.0	315.0	315.0	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	ha	1.0	71.0	71.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					726.0

Comments:

structures; channels 140mts long, W 1m depth 0.45m

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

labour intensive and time consuming in the digging of channels

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 fertility: Low

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 50-100 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 1% - 2%
5% of the land users are very rich and own 30% of the land (with over 10 cows).
10% of the land users are rich and own 25% of the land (with 5 - 10 cows).
20% of the land users are average wealthy and own 20% of the land (with 3-5 cows).
25% of the land users are poor and own 15% of the land (with 1-3).
40% of the land users are poor and own 10% of the land (without cows).

Off-farm income specification: majority of farmers are poor have no access to loans
Level of mechanization: Manual labour (cleaning, weeding and harvest) and animal traction (both ranked 1)

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

Comments:

Land ownership: group, individual, not titled, individual, titled

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

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

Comments:

20% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

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

Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Only one close neighbour has shown interest in copying him. ‘A few’ others from further away, also have. One constraint to adoption is the large amount of labour involved in setting up the system.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
increased incomes
increased soil moisture content How can they be sustained / enhanced? adopt mulching

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
water runoff can be managed easily How can they be sustained / enhanced? constantly maintain the structure
increased yields How can they be sustained / enhanced? adopt composting

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?
need skills for the adopters	adopter need training

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
labour intensive	encourage group work
costly to construct	encourage household savings