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)

Bureau of Soils and Water Management (Bureau of Soils and Water Management) - Philippines

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

Visayas State University (VSU) - Philippines

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Landusers are organized into a group or association to undertake jointly activities in the farm which include operation, input procurement, and marketing of produced crops.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Compact farming in Brgy. Villaconzoilo was started by the barangay captain Mr. Alex O. Aborita wherein parcels of lands were acquired for the association to utilize. He organized the Villaconzoilo farmers’ group also known as the Compact Farming Agriculture Cooperative where he introduced new technologies to improve the farming system of the community. Farmers cultivate vegetable on a contract growing scheme. Some of the farm practices consist of growing vegetables and fruits using indigenous organic materials as soil conditioner and livestock raising. Vegetables and fruits are cultivated in divided parts but in the same area.

Purpose of the Technology: Compact farming was organized to enhance group interactions and leadership among members of the association.The aim of the landusers in growing organic vegetables is to revive and sustain soil fertility and maximize waste management practice. Marigold was also planted in between plots within the farm to prevent and control insect and pest manifestation. Landusers in the barangay were empowered through farming and conservation of the forest area. Through this technology, marketability and available markets for the produced commodities were increased. The association received numerous award in the regional and provincial level because of their demonstration of a productive and profitable farming system in the upland area.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: It started in 2011 with 18 farmers investing 1000 pesos (22 dollars) each to buy initial inputs such as land, seeds and fertilizer. The area was cleared for agricultural activities. Produced are high value crops such as tomatoes, lettuce, pechay, cabbage, carrots, beans, broccoli, cucumber, and radish. These are sold not only in Jaro but also in the neighbouring municipalities and big markets in Leyte. The barangay was dubbed as the “Vegetable Basket” and the “Watermelon Queen” because of their production. Activities in the farm such as plowing, harrowing, establishment of plots, fertilizer application, transplanting, watering, spraying and harvesting are done in a rotational basis among members of the association.

Natural / human environment: Most of the farmers cultivated one parcel with size ranging from 1000-2000 square meters. Land ownership and land use right is communal. The farm production is managed by the cooperative composed of small scale land users. Members of the association are enganged in off-farm activities such as hunting and hired labor for additional income. The municipality of Jaro, Leyte has a type A modified climatic classification with an average monthly rainfall of 1000 to 1500 mm. Typhoons that usually come in October or November is very destructive to any standing crop. These factors discourage farmers to apply external inputs like fertilizer. The municipality has mostly acidic soil type with pH ranging 4.8 to 5.6.

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 land users' innovation

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

Comments:

Major cash crop: tomato, carrot, watermelon, lettuce, broccoli

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): low soil fertility, nutrient imbalance

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

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

Comments:

Water supply: mixed rainfed - irrigated, mixed rainfed - irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• waste management/ waste water management

• Sustain soil fertility

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Type of agronomic measures: temporary trashlines, soil conditioners (lime, gypsum), rotations / fallows

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Ca: acidification

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bl: loss of soil life

Main causes of degradation: soil management (improper fertilizer application), crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (disposal/utilization of weeds and crops of weeds residue)

Secondary causes of degradation: Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

pesos

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

45.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Clearing of the area

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	Clearing of the area	ha	1.0	222.22	222.22	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					222.22
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					4.94

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Plowing
2.	Harrowing
3.	Establishment of Plots
4.	Organic Fertilizer Application
5.	Transplanting
6.	Watering
7.	Spraying of botanical pesticide
8.	Harvesting

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
Plant material	Seedlings	ha	1.0	111.11	111.11	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Fertilizer	ha	1.0	55.56	55.56	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					166.67
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					3.7

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 is medium
Soil drainage/infiltration is good
Soil water storage is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: < 0.5%
20% of the land users are rich and own 20% of the land.
70% of the land users are average wealthy and own 70% of the land.
10% of the land users are poor and own 10% of the land.
Market orientation is commercial/market (contract with Robinsons supermarket) and mixed (subsistence and commercial)

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

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Other ecological impacts

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	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	not 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)?

Comments:

The total asset of the cooperative is worth 20 million after five years of starting the technology.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

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

38

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

• 91-100%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

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

There is a strong trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Most of the land users in the community are encouraged to join because of the benefits that the members could gain. Members are paid higher in terms of wages compared to non-members.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view

Land users of the cooperative were empowered through their knowledge in growing crops and raising livestock. Their income were increased due to the diversified high value vegetables planted within the farm. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Provision of trainings by the government for the land users in the cooperative on proper packaging of the fresh vegetables, and secondary processing of crops to increase their market value.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Strong leadership and knowledge on farming of the barangay captain Mr. Alex O. Arborito who encouraged the land users to invest and join the cooperative.
The area was opened for ecological tourism and as training sites for agricultural technicians/workers, on the job training's for students from the university to experience first hand the farming system of the cooperative. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Delineate specific areas only for training grounds as not to disrupt activities in the whole farm area.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Lack of irrigation system that could be utilize during dry season	Provision of solar pump project to ensure continuity of water supply to irrigate crops during dry season.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information