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)

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

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

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

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

Comments:

The technology is directly related land degradation and hence it can be declared as sustainable land management technology.

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Integrated Farm Land Conservation (IFLC) comprises of farm terrace (bund) construction, construction of drainage structures, bund stabilization and livestock exclosure,

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Integrated Farm Land Conservation (IFLC) is practiced within a watershed on individual farmland. Main characteristics of the technology are conserving soil and moisture and at the same time safe disposal of excess runoff.
Farm terrace construction is actually terrace development, starting with soil or stone bunding that enables the development of a terrace, i.e. bench formation due to soil erosion, sediment deposition and tillage movement through time (5-15 years). The bunds are levelled or graded, the walls having a bottom width of 0.8 - 1.0 m, and a top width of about 0.4 m, the bund height is up to 0.6 m. Bunds are constructed parallel to the slope or slightly graded, on slopes ranging from 8 - 20 % gradients, and at a the vertical interval of 1-2 m between two bunds. The bunds are stabilized with vegetative measures like grass and legume shrubs. The drainage structures consist of the ditch along bunds, cut-off drains above cultivated land and waterways through it, the depth of a cut-off drain being 0.3 - 0.4 m and the average width 1.5 m, the depth of the waterway being 0.3 - 0.5 m, and the width of the waterway being 1.5 - 2 m. For bund and terrace protection in the initial years, livestock is excluded and farmers exercise cut and carry. Livestock exclosure encourages land users to practice crop residue management.
The purpose of the technology, in general, is to conserve soil and water, minimizing slope gradients of the farmland, improve soil moisture, reduce compaction, enhance infiltration and thus improve the recharge of groundwater. Furthermore, livestock exclosure contributes to soil fertility enhancement following crop residue management. The technology initially maintains soil fertility and through time, it has its own contribution to the betterment / increment of crop yield. Nevertheless some farmers complain about the land being occupied by the bunds, although this is later on compensated, as forage can be produced on the riser slopes of the growing terraces.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

Ethiopia

Region/ State/ Province:

Amhara Region, Ethiopia

Further specification of location:

Abagerima Watershed in the Highlands of Ethiopia

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, specify area covered (in km2):

3.0

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:

• 1-10 km2

Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

Nee

Comments:

The site is not permanently protected. The site faced some damage due on and off free grazing instead of consistently exercising cut and carry practice. In some cases deliberate damage caused by few individuals by freely grazed the site.

Map

×

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2013

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

• Government led community free labor mobilization for the natural resource conservation measures

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Government-led community free labor mobilization for the natural resource conservation measures, supported by Water and Land Resource Centre, Addis Ababa University and Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• create beneficial economic 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):

• Agro-silvopastoralism

Cropland

• Annual cropping
• Perennial (non-woody) cropping
• Tree and shrub cropping

Annual cropping - Specify crops:

• cereals - maize
• cereals - wheat (winter)
• legumes and pulses - other

• teff

Annual cropping system:

Continuous wheat/barley/oats/upland rice

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:

• avocado
• coffee, shade grown
• mango, mangosteen, guava
• papaya

• Dodonaea angustifolia, Rhamnus Prinoides, Catha edulis

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Is intercropping practiced?

Nee

Is crop rotation practiced?

Ja

If yes, specify:

maize followed by pulses followed by wheat followed by teff, and rarely, fallow.

Grazing land

Intensive grazing/ fodder production:

• Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing

Animal type:

• cattle - dairy
• cattle - non-dairy working
• goats
• mules and asses
• poultry
• sheep

• Bees

Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?

Ja

If yes, specify:

cattle is mainly used for ploughing (oxen), sheep and goats for meat.

Products and services:

• meat
• milk
• transport/ draught

Species:

cattle - non-dairy working

Count:

2500

Species:

goats

Count:

830

Species:

sheep

Count:

2000

Species:

poultry

Count:

10200

Species:

mules and asses

Count:

1064

Forest/ woodlands

• (Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands
• Tree plantation, afforestation

(Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands: Specify management type:

• Dead wood/ prunings removal
• Non-wood forest use

Type of (semi-)natural forest:

• tropical moist deciduous forest natural vegetation

Tree plantation, afforestation: Specify origin and composition of species:

• Monoculture exotic variety
• Mixed varieties

Type of tree plantation, afforestation:

• tropical mountain systems plantation

Type of tree:

• Acacia species
• Eucalyptus globulus

• Cordia Africana, Olea african, Ficus vasta, Croton macrostachyus

Are the trees specified above deciduous or evergreen?

• mixed deciduous/ evergreen

Products and services:

• Timber
• Fuelwood
• Grazing/ browsing

Comments:

Livestock population data for the whole watershed

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):

• Agro-silvopastoralism

Cropland

• Annual cropping
• Perennial (non-woody) cropping
• Tree and shrub cropping

Annual cropping - Specify crops:

• cereals - maize
• cereals - wheat (winter)
• legumes and pulses - other

• teff

Annual cropping system:

Continuous wheat/barley/oats/upland rice

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:

• coffee, shade grown

• Dodonaea angustifolia, Rhamnus Prinoides, Catha edulis

Is intercropping practiced?

Nee

Is crop rotation practiced?

Ja

If yes, specify:

maize followed by pulses followed by wheat followed by teff, and rarely, fallow

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:

• Semi-nomadic pastoralism
• Ranching

Animal type:

• cattle - non-dairy working
• goats
• sheep

Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?

Ja

If yes, specify:

livestock was allowed to graze all over the place before conservation, except on cultivated land during the growing season.

Products and services:

• meat
• milk
• transport/ draught

Forest/ woodlands

• (Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands

(Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands: Specify management type:

• Clear felling
• Dead wood/ prunings removal

Type of (semi-)natural forest:

• tropical mountain systems natural vegetation

Type of tree:

• Acacia species
• Eucalyptus globulus

Are the trees specified above deciduous or evergreen?

• mixed deciduous/ evergreen

Products and services:

• Timber
• Fuelwood
• Grazing/ browsing

Comments:

Land use change (of Abagerima watershed over the intervention periods (2010 and 2017):

Land use change Ha.
Cultivated land to bush/ shrub land4.1
Cultivated land to degraded grass land 3.9
Cultivated land to grass land 5.8
Cultivated land to Homestead 8.0
Cultivated land to plantation 4.9
Degraded grass land to bush/ shrub land 1.2
Grass land to bush/ shrub land 3.2
Grass land to cultivated land 6.1
Grass land to degraded grass land 4.0
Grass land to riverine vegetation1.2

Source: - Achievements and Impacts of Learning Watershed Approach: Technologies, Innovations and Evidence for Scaling up WLRC Research Report 3, Addis Ababa University, 2019, Addis Ababa

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

Comments:

cropping is based mainly on rain-fed, farmers utilize groundwater for perennial crop production on a small scale in their homestead development areas

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• area closure (stop use, support restoration)
• integrated crop-livestock management
• water diversion and drainage

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

• A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
• A5: Seed management, improved varieties
• A6: Residue management

A6: Specify residue management:

A 6.4: retained

vegetative measures

• V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants

structural measures

• S1: Terraces
• S2: Bunds, banks
• S3: Graded ditches, channels, waterways
• S4: Level ditches, pits

management measures

• M1: Change of land use type
• M2: Change of management/ intensity level

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

• Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
• Wg: gully erosion/ gullying
• Wr: riverbank erosion
• Wo: offsite degradation effects

physical soil deterioration

• Pc: compaction
• Pi: soil sealing

biological degradation

• Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
• Bh: loss of habitats
• Bl: loss of soil life
• Bp: increase of pests/ diseases, loss of predators

water degradation

• Hs: change in quantity of surface water
• Hg: change in groundwater/aquifer level
• Hp: decline of surface water quality
• Hq: decline of groundwater quality

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

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The height of the bund is less than 0.6 m, the width of the bund is less than 1.6 m, the average slope is 8 - 15 %, the veritcal interval between two bunds is 1- 2 m, and the average spacing between structures is about 15 m

Author:

Yismaw Wuletaw

Date:

24/10/2018

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

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

1.0

4.3 Establishment activities

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

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

Government-led community free labor mobilization for the natural resource conservation measures, supported by Water and Land Resource Centre, Addis Ababa University and Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern.

Comments:

The community contributed free labor contribution. The government and Water and Land Resource Center provided technical(capacity building and monitoring) and input support.
According to the 2019 Project unpublished report, the total person days (pds) for Abagerima Community Watershed is 181,920 and for Integrated Farm land Conservation approximately 43,400 person days (Source: Gombat and Laguna Kebele level Office of Agriculture). By virtue, the community contributed their labour almost for half working day (four hours) the total person days have been divided by 2 and multiplied by 3 USD (which is the approximate daily rate).
Regarding the tool cost, the cost was covered by the government and the project (WLRC).

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

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

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

The community contributed free labor contribution. The WLRC provided capacity development and input support.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The season, as especially during sowing, weeding and harvesting times the labour costs are scarce and hence, high.

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

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:

• state
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)
• individual

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Nee

Comments:

In case of drinking water, there is some organization to manage the resource

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

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

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 farmland owner considers "with" and "without" scenario and the comparative labour cost.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• > 50%

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

• 91-100%

6.6 Adaptation

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

Nee

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

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

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Integrated Farm Land, Conservation, Yismaw Wuletaw, 2018

Available from where? Costs?

Can be obtained from author

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

none

URL:

-

7.4 General comments

The questionnaire is easily understood and can be filled provided that the information can be collected in the field or with informants.

General remark: The comments are forwarded, as observed at field, because when we talk about Integrated Farm Land Conservation (IFLC), it should be integrated as much as possible/ inclusive for better results, as the ultimate goals of IFLC are:
oEnvironmental benefits - Conserving soil and moisture, carbon sequestration, improving the local climate;
oEconomic benefits - improving crop productivity, generating forage as a result of structural stabilization, and if it is implemented in an organized manner, it can also generate further economic benefits from gesho, fruit and selected trees like Grevillea robusta and Acacia dicurrens planted on structures;
oSocial benefits – contributing to social prestige as a result of producing reasonable production (if the concept of “optimizing the productivity per unit area, water and time” is respected, the livelihood of the rural community is also improved simply due to maintaining healthy soil and use of input for structural stabilization – i.e making the structures productive. In advanced terms, if IFLC is implemented in a well organized manner, the production through protection concept will be maintained. Thus, IFLC will contribute to the stability of the community within their surroundings/ watersheds and enable the transferring healthy soil/ land for the next generation.