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

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

Environmental Land Management and Rural Livelihoods (ELMAR)

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

Tajik Soil Insitute (Tajik Soil Institute) - Tajikistan

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

2007

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

2.3 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

Indicate year of implementation:

2007

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:

• during experiments/ research
• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• create beneficial economic impact

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:

• full irrigation

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• integrated soil fertility management
• irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

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

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

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

3.0

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	None	Management	None
2.	None	Agronomic	None
3.	None	Agronomic	None
4.	None	Management	None
5.	None	Agronomic	None
6.	None	Agronomic	None
7.	None	Agronomic	None

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

If possible, break down the costs of establishment according to the following table, specifying inputs and costs per input. If you are unable to break down the costs, give an estimation of the total costs of establishing the Technology:

3000.0

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	None	None	15.0	20.0	300.0	100.0
Equipment	None	None	4.0	100.0	400.0	10.0
Equipment	None	None	1.0	50.0	50.0	10.0
Equipment	None	None	100.0	3.0	300.0
Plant material	None	None	200.0	3.5	700.0	10.0
Fertilizers and biocides	None	None	150.0	1.5	225.0
Fertilizers and biocides	None	None	200.0	1.0	200.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					2175.0

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	None	Agronomic	None
2.	None	Agronomic	None
3.	None	Agronomic	None
4.	None	Agronomic	None
5.	None	Agronomic	None
6.	None	Agronomic	None

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

If possible, break down the costs of maintenance according to the following table, specifying inputs and costs per input. If you are unable to break down the costs, give an estimation of the total costs of maintaining the Technology:

1000.0

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	None	None	15.0	20.0	300.0	100.0
Labour	None	None	2.0	100.0	200.0
Equipment	None	None	2.0	25.0	50.0	100.0
Equipment	None	None	2.0	25.0	50.0	100.0
Other	None	None	50.0	3.0	150.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					750.0

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Ja

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Nee

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:

• state
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• leased

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

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 temperature		increase	very well
seasonal temperature	summer	increase	very well
seasonal rainfall	winter	decrease	very well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	very well
local hailstorm	moderately
local sandstorm/ duststorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
heatwave	well
drought	moderately

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
extended growing period	well

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

• 10-50%

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

• 10-50%

6.6 Adaptation

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

Nee

7.1 Methods/ sources of information