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)

Carbon Benefits Project (CBP)

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

Water and Land Resource Centre (WLRC) - Ethiopia

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

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Closed area management is an area within a watershed into which human and livestock access is limited, and the area is left for natural recovery of vegetation and soil. Management relates to activities by the community to ensure such protection and to support regeneration, such as constructing drainage and retention structures, selective bush removal, regular grass cutting, occasional tree planting, and organisation of economic activities like grass cutting.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

1. The closed area management technology is applied within Abagerima Learning Watershed of the Water and Land Resource Centre project.
2. In the area closures, community-based participatory management is applied to recover degraded areas.
3. The area is closed from agricultural activities and livestock grazing, while water harvesting and drainage structures are constructed, like small trenches and cut-off drains.
4. Natural grasses are regularly cut and carried, and selective trees are planted.
5. Forage growth for animal feed is encouraged, thereby reducing soil erosion, storing water, reducing soil loss, and avoiding conflicts with down-stream users.
6. The community is committed and responsible for closed area management, such as construction of trenches for water drainage and harvesting, plantation of trees, and to reduce soil erosion. The communities of the Abagerima Learning Watershed are very happy to manage their closed areas and equally share the grass biomass, and later on selective trees.
7. As a consequence, forage biomass has been increasing over the past 6 years and is regularly cut and carried, while indigenous and introduced trees are growing.
8. Through these activities, heavily degraded and overgrazed land could be transformed into productive land.

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:

2012

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.):

The Water and Land Resource Centre was highly involved in this area as one of its Learning Watersheds, and area closure was an element integrated into the landscape to protect and managed the area by using cut & carry system.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• create beneficial economic impact
• create beneficial social impact

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Ja

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agroforestry

Comments:

Livestock population:
Because it is not possible to list more than 5 different livestock for its "populations" the population of poultry is missing (1539 chicken)

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• Yes (Please fill out the questions below with regard to the land use before implementation of the Technology)

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Ja

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agroforestry

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry
• area closure (stop use, support restoration)

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:

• prevent land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 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:

• USD

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	survey	October (end of rainy season)
2.	planning & community awareness	October
3.	preparing materials	October
4.	design & layout	November
5.	implementation	December (beginning of dry season)

Comments:

Community awareness was raised by frequent visits of different stakeholders to Abagerima Learning Watershed.

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	construction of trenches	person-days	210.0	3.7	777.0	0.0
Labour	pit preparation for tree planting	numbers	90.0	1.5	135.0	0.0
Equipment	hand tools	numbers	240.0	2.8	672.0	0.0
Plant material	tree seedlings	numbers	106.0	1.5	159.0	50.0
Plant material	grass and legume seeds	kg	200.0	22.0	4400.0	50.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					6143.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					6143.0

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

Water and Land Resource Centre (WLRC), Agricultural Office and in the Abagerima watershed the communities are involved in all types of SLM activities

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	grass cutting	once per year
2.	bush clearing	irregular

4.6 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	grass cutting	person-days	150.0	3.7	555.0	100.0
Labour	bush clearing	person-days	20.0	3.7	74.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					629.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					629.0

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Establishment of the technology at the initial stage (digging of trenches, cut-off drains and waterways) causes high costs.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

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:

Both surface & ground water availabilities are small in March & April at the end of the dry season.

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

5.7 Average area of land used 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:

• open access (unorganized)
• individual

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	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	very well
seasonal temperature	winter	increase	very well
annual rainfall			very well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	very well
local thunderstorm	very well

Biological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
epidemic diseases	very well
insect/ worm infestation	very 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

• > 50%

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

400-480 households

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

• 11-50%

Comments:

The community got a technical adviser plus small material incentives, while there was high mobilization for SWC work.

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
Grass biomass increased, run off to foot slope of cultivated land decreased, water availability increased and conflicts resolved. Closed area is also used as a home for wild animals.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Areas are giving high forage biomass for animals.
Restoring the water & the vegetation cover are fine.
Generally the closed areas improve the livelihoods of the community due to its economical, social & environmental advantages.

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?
Older people complain that animals should still be allowed to openly graze.	Give continuous service for the community.
Trees are not fully adapt to climate, environment and use.	Select appropriate technology; reintroduce moisture harvesting structures (hillside terraces)
Resource allocation	Raise external support for the Learning watershed

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Resources allocation & sharing of benefits	Needs to be organized by group & clear bylaws for better management & sharing of resources

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

none

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

none

7.4 General comments

The WOCAT QT is an interesting database & very simple questionniare for a SLM technician.