Tradition forest establishment in semi-arid land [Tanzania, United Republic of]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: Patrick Gervas Mbanguka Lameck
- Editor: –
- Reviewers: David Streiff, Deborah Niggli
Mlagha (Gogo-Tanzania)
technologies_1394 - Tanzania, United Republic of
View sections
Expand all Collapse all1. General information
1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology
SLM specialist:
Dumea Hamidu
007-022-2866907
Ministry of Agriculture and cooperatives, SCLUPS
PO Box 9071 Dar-es-Salaam
Tanzania, United Republic of
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Inades Formation Tanzania (Inades Formation Tanzania)Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Ministry of Agriculture of Tanzania (MoA) - Tanzania, United Republic of1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT
When were the data compiled (in the field)?
23/12/1999
The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:
Ja
1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology
Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?
Nee
2. Description of the SLM Technology
2.1 Short description of the Technology
Definition of the Technology:
Protecting and establishing bushy trees into forest of single straight stem trees
2.2 Detailed description of the Technology
Description:
The place was completely bare. It was demarketed and fenced using shrubs. Shoots were identified, prunning was done to reduce the knots and straighten the stem, harvesting is done on the trees.area has unreliable rainfall.
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
Tanzania, United Republic of
Region/ State/ Province:
Dodoma
Further specification of location:
Dodoma urban/Bihawana
Map
×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.):
farmer innovation
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology
- reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
- preserve/ improve biodiversity
3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied
Cropland
- Annual cropping
- Tree and shrub cropping
Main crops (cash and food crops):
major cash and food crop (CT): Terminalia sericea and sorghum
other: Maize
Forest/ woodlands
Products and services:
- Timber
- Fuelwood
- Fruits and nuts
- Other forest products
Comments:
Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): defprestation and declining soil fertility
Constraints of infrastructure network (roads, railways, pipe lines, power lines)
Constraints of wilderness
3.3 Further information about land use
Number of growing seasons per year:
- 1
Specify:
Longest growing period in days: 150; Longest growing period from month to month: Dec - Apr
3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs
- area closure (stop use, support restoration)
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:
- 100-1,000 km2
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
management measures
- M1: Change of land use type
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
soil erosion by water
- Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
soil erosion by wind
- Et: loss of topsoil
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. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing
Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate
Technical knowledge required for land users: low
Main technical functions: improvement of ground cover
Secondary technical functions: increase in organic matter, sediment retention / trapping, sediment harvesting, reduction in wind speed, increase in soil fertility
Change of land use type: from bare to forest
Other type of management: livestock management: controlled grazing
4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:
- per Technology area
Indicate size and area unit:
ha
Specify currency used for cost calculations:
- US Dollars
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:
1.90
4.4 Establishment activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | harvesting | Management | when ready |
2. | demarkation | Management | all time |
3. | fencing | Management | sept |
4. | identification of shoots | Management | all time |
5. | prunning of lower branches | Management | occassionally |
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 | Rehabilitate woodland and fencing | persons/day/ha | 367.0 | 1.9 | 697.3 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Animal traction | ha | 1.0 | 550.0 | 550.0 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Tools | ha | 1.0 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 100.0 |
Total costs for establishment of the Technology | 1254.8 |
Comments:
Duration of establishment phase: 72 month(s)
4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing/ frequency | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | identification | Management | any time / monthly |
2. | prunning | Management | any time / monthly |
3. | fence repair | Management | any time / monthly |
4. | night security | Management | any time / monthly |
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 | Maintenance | persons/day/ha | 103.0 | 1.9 | 195.7 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Tools | ha | 1.0 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 100.0 |
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology | 203.2 |
Comments:
based on labour required/ha
4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs
Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:
purchase of animals, fencing labour, labour for collecting brushwood
5. Natural and human environment
5.1 Climate
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
Specifications/ comments on rainfall:
Also 501-750 mm
Agro-climatic zone
- semi-arid
- arid
5.2 Topography
Slopes on average:
- 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
Altitudinal zone:
- 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.
Comments and further specifications on topography:
Slopes on average: Also moderate
5.3 Soils
Soil depth on average:
- 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)
Topsoil organic matter:
- medium (1-3%)
- low (<1%)
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: Also moderately deep
Soil fertility is very low - medium
Soil drainage / infiltration is medium
Soil water storage capacity is medium
5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology
Market orientation of production system:
- subsistence (self-supply)
- mixed (subsistence/ commercial
Off-farm income:
- less than 10% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
- average
- rich
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 2% - 3%
15% of the land users are rich and own 20% of the land.
50% of the land users are average wealthy and own 60% of the land (with 8-17 cattle).
30% of the land users are poor and own 10% of the land.
15% of the land users are poor and own 10% of the land.
Off-farm income specification: most are farmers
5.7 Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology
- < 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
Comments:
Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology: Also 5-15 ha
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- state
- company
6. Impacts and concluding statements
6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown
Socio-economic impacts
Production
wood production
Income and costs
farm income
Other socio-economic impacts
beekeping
pastures
medicinal
Socio-cultural impacts
community institutions
national institutions
conflict mitigation
Ecological impacts
Soil
soil moisture
soil cover
soil loss
Climate and disaster risk reduction
wind velocity
6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown
downstream flooding
wind transported sediments
6.4 Cost-benefit analysis
How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:
slightly positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:
positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
6.5 Adoption of the Technology
- 1-10%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):
400 households covering 5 percent of stated area (5% of all land users)
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
- 90-100%
Comments:
400 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates
There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology
Comments on adoption trend: 10 have started
6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view |
---|
mulching material |
medicinal plants |
firewood |
pastures |
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view |
---|
improve ground cover |
improve soil moisture |
improves soil fertility |
provides pasture and fuelwood |
improves honey production |
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? |
---|---|
night theft | night guard |
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view | How can they be overcome? |
---|---|
one species grown | plant fruit trees |
no contour bunds | construct the bunds |
theft | train other to adopt the technology |
7. References and links
7.1 Methods/ sources of information
- field visits, field surveys
- interviews with land users
7.2 References to available publications
Title, author, year, ISBN:
farmer innovators networkshop
Available from where? Costs?
INADES Tanzania
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
No links
Modules
No modules