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

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

01/10/2010

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

Comments:

Rainwater harvesting using furrow micro-catchments created by ox-driven plough is a common practice among agropastoral communities in semi-arid southeastern Kenya. It is an important component of seedbed preparation prior to the planting season. This technology is aimed at harvesting rainwater to prolong water availability and soil moisture content for seed germination and subsequent growth and development of the emerging seedlings.

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Ox-ploughed furrow micro-catchments are intentionally built as part of seedbed preparation to harvest rainwater. Commonly used in dryland environments, the micro-catchment prolong water availability for seed germination and growth and development of the emerging seedlings.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Creation of furrow micro-catchments using an ox-driven plough is a traditional seedbed preparation practice among agropastoral communities inhabiting arid and semi-arid environments in Kenya. The process involves minimal soil disturbance by intentionally creating shallow furrows (about 20 cm depth) using an ox-driven plough. Oxen commonly used predominantly have a light and bright skin coat. This is aimed at reflecting away excess heat from the sun. Consequently, the oxen are less fatigued and can therefore plough for a longer period of time. The furrow microcatchments are intentionally created across the slope to harvest rainwater to prolong water availability for seed germnination and subsequent growth and development of emerging seedlings. Furthermore, the ox-plough breaks the soil hard-pan common in dryland environments. Therefore, the microcatchments also facilitate seedling root penetration to the lower horizons. Prolonged water availability, especially in dryland environments, promotes growth and development of fast growing and early maturing drought tolerant crops and indigenous pasture production, consequently better crop yields and pasture production.

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)

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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

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:

• 2

Specify:

Two rainy seasons in Kenya; long rains (March-April-May), short rains (October-November-December)

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• minimal soil disturbance
• integrated soil fertility management
• water harvesting

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:

• > 10,000 km2

Comments:

Common practice in southeastern Kenya counties of Kitui (24,000 km2), Machakos (5900 km2), and Makueni (8000 km2)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Ox-ploughed furrow micro-catchments 15-20 cm deep and 10-15 cm wide. This is a typical traditional method of seedbed preparation in the arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) in southeastern Kenya. The micro-cathcments are intentionally made prior to the rainy season. Thereafter, the seeds are then sown along the micro-catchments to harvest rainwater. This prolongs water availability and maintains sufficient soil moisture content to facilitate germination and subsequent growth and development of the seedlings. Moreover, the ox-driven plough breaks the soil hard-pan common in dryland environments. This minimal soil disturbance promotes root penetration.

Seeds are covered with light amount of soil to facilitate seedling emergence.

Generally, the micro-catchments are created across the slope. Slope should be generally flat or very gentle (<5%) to reduce the speed of run-off, thus prevent soil erosion.

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• US Dollars

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Creation of furrow micro-catchments with ox-plough	Vegetative	Before onset of rains

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	Casual and Household Labour	person-days	1.0	20.0	20.0	100.0
Equipment	Hiring ox-driven plough	person-days	1.0	400.0	400.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					420.0

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Re-ploughing and enforcing micro-catchments	Vegetative	Before onset of next rains

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	Casual and household labour	person-days	1.0	5.0	5.0	100.0
Equipment	Hiring ox-driven plough	person-days	1.0	400.0	400.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					405.0

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Cost of hiring ox-plough - before the onset of the rains, there is a high demand for ox-ploughs for seedbed preparation and creation of micro-catchments. This increased demand (i.e. hiring the ox-plough) greatly influences the costs.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• convex situations

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.

Luvisol, %C 0.75-1.56%; %N 0.3-0.4%; P 13-15 ppm; CEC 6-19 me/100 g soil; K 1-2 me/100 g soil; Bulk density 1.2-1.3 g cm3; soil pH 8

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Nee

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Nee

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Water quantity and quality is highly dependant on rainfall

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

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:

• communal/ village
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

Comments:

Land use rights - both communal and individual
Water use rights - both communal and individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Ecological impacts

Soil

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	Type of climatic change/ extreme	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual rainfall		decrease	moderately
seasonal rainfall	wet/ rainy season	decrease	moderately

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%

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

• 50-90%

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

Nee

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Relatively a cheap method of in-situ rainwater harvesting to harness water availability for crop and pasture production.
Prolong rainfed water availability
Breaks the soil hardpan developed over time due to continuous cultivation and hoof action of grazing animals. This promotes rainwater infiltration to lower horizon, thus minimizes runoff.
Reduced human labour requirement and faster method of seedbed preparation compared to hand held hoe

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Breaks the soil hardpan developed over time due to continuous cultivation and hoof action of grazing animals. This promotes rainwater infiltration to lower horizon, thus minimizes runoff.
Prolong rainfed water availability
Relatively cheap
Reduced human labour requirement and faster method of seedbed preparation compared to hand held hoe

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?
Ox-plough availability and accessibility i.e. demand, if not individually owned	Supply affordable ox-driven ploughs to rural households
Oxen need training before they can be used for ploughing. This takes some time.	Research outreach and extension services
Oxen get exhausted thus can´t plough for many hours in the drylands	Simple and light mechanization for creating furrow microcatchments

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
High costs of hiring ox-ploughs when in high demand	Joint ownership of ox-ploughs among neighbours, agropastoral farmer groups to eliminate the cost of hiring.
Semi-permanent - i.e. don´t last beyond a growing season and therefore new ones need to be created every growing season.	Creation of macrocatchments and/or trenches that are deeper and last longer.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

KZ Mganga, NKR Musimba, MM Nyangito, DM Nyariki, AW Mwang’ombe. 2015. The choice of grass species to combat desertification in semi-arid Kenyan rangelands is greatly influenced by their forage value for livestock. Grass and Forage Science 70: 161-167.

Available from where? Costs?

Grass and Forage Science Journal; USD 38

Title, author, year, ISBN:

3. KZ Mganga, NKR Musimba, DM Nyariki. 2015. Combining sustainable land management technologies to combat land degradation and improve rural livelihoods in semi-arid lands in Kenya. Environmental Management 56: 1538-1548

Available from where? Costs?

Environmental Management Journal, USD 43.34

Title, author, year, ISBN:

2. KZ Mganga, NKR Musimba, DM Nyariki. 2015. Competition indices of three perennial grasses used to rehabilitate degraded semi-arid rangelands in Kenya. The Rangelands Journal 37: 489-495

Available from where? Costs?

The Rangelands Journal, USD 25

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

The choice of grass species to combat desertification in semi-arid Kenyan rangelands is greatly influenced by their forage value for livestock

URL:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gfs.12089/abstract

Title/ description:

Combining Sustainable Land Management Technologies to Combat Land Degradation and Improve Rural Livelihoods in Semi-arid Lands in Kenya

URL:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00267-015-0579-9

Title/ description:

Competition indices of three perennial grasses used to rehabilitate degraded semi-arid rangelands in Kenya

URL:

http://www.publish.csiro.au/RJ/RJ15023