Technologies

Vetiver Hedge Barrier along Seashore and River bank [China]

vetiver hedge barrier in huo garden

technologies_961 - China

Completeness: 61%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:

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. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Uprightness to the main windward, planting Vetiver hedge as barriers to prevent wind erosion.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

This technology is to use a good SWC vegetable --- Vetiver to form permanent hedge barrier. The barrier is upright to the main windward or along the river & dike bank. It is pruned 1-2 times after 2 months of planting. It can grow at about 1.5 m high within one year. Vetiver is a perennial plant, and has a strong fibrous roots, which can stretch 3 m beneath soils. It breeds by root & cane, and has strong adaptability. Vetiver is hygrophobe and can endure poor and saline-alkali soil. It is regarded as a saved money & low in labor input but with good benefits. This SWC technology is worth to be applied extensively.

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:

China

Region/ State/ Province:

Fujian

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):

0.5

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 0.1-1 km2
Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 0.5 km2.

The SWC area is about 0.5 sqkm.

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 projects/ external interventions
Comments (type of project, etc.):

From India.

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • fodder crops - grasses
  • oilseed crops - groundnuts
  • root/tuber crops - sweet potatoes, yams, taro/cocoyam, other
  • rice, vetiver (fodder crop)
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 365Longest growing period from month to month: Jan - Dec

Comments:

Main crops (cash and food crops):Rice-peanut-sweat potato, vetiver etc.

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Serious wind erosion damages crops and cultivated land along the seashore.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Crops were often damaged and crop yield is decreasing gradually.

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Rice-peanut-sweat potato etc.

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • rainfed
Comments:

Water supply also full irrigation

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

vegetative measures

vegetative measures

  • V1: Tree and shrub cover

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by wind

soil erosion by wind

  • Et: loss of topsoil
chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

  • Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
water degradation

water degradation

  • Ha: aridification
Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Et: loss of topsoil

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Ha: aridification

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: low

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: Wind-break

Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover, increase in organic matter, increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, water harvesting / increase water supply, Increase in soil fertility

Mulching
Material/ species: Vetiver
Quantity/ density: 10000
Remarks: alignment

Grass species: Vetiver

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 30.00%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is (see figure below): 20.00%

Gradient along the rows / strips: 50.00%

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

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 =:

8.3

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

3.61

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. treating material mid-March
2. soil preparation early March
3. planting mid-March
4. water planting day

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 24 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. pruning mid-May /
2. pruning early June /
3. applying fertilizer later May /

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

Comments:

Areas of vetiver cover.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

seeds and labor.

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

1182.00

Agro-climatic zone
  • humid

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:
  • not relevant

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • low (<1%)
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: very low

Soil drainage / infiltration: good

Soil water storage capacity: very low

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Off-farm income:
  • less than 10% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
  • animal traction
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 200-500 persons/km2

Annual population growth: < 0.5%

30% of the land users are average wealthy and own 20% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: This is an experimental project with small area so that not many persons involved in it.

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:
  • communal/ village
  • individual, titled

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

60

Quantity after SLM:

35

Soil

soil loss

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

4.5

Quantity after SLM:

2

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

neutral/ balanced

Long-term returns:

very positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

positive

Long-term returns:

very positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • > 50%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

100 households and 100% of the area

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 51-90%
Comments:

50% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

30 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: estimates

50% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

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

Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Climate here is quite suitable for vetiver growing and it is easy to plant with low input and high output.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules