Plastering a biodynamic compost heap with a paste made from a mixture of soil and cow dung. (Samden L Sherpa)

Biodynamic composting (Nepal)

Jaibic Mal Banune Takika (Nepali) (Main Contributor: Samden Sherpa, ICIMOD)

Description

A faster and more effective way to produce high quality compost in large quantities by surface composting using dry and green farm biomass piled in a heap.

Biodynamic denotes a method of organic farming that emphasizes a holistic understanding of the interrelationships between soil, plants, and animals in a self-sustaining system. It excludes the use of artificial chemicals and stresses the importance of integrating farm animals, the cultivation of crops, and caring for the land. Fermented herbal and mineral preparations are used as compost additives and field sprays.

Purpose of the Technology: Biodynamic composting is an inexpensive means of producing a large amount of compost within a relatively short time compared to other methods. It is ideal for farmers who require large amounts of compost, such as for orchards; or when several households get together to produce and share compost. This type of composting also helps to store soil carbon, assists irrigation practices that keep fields alternatively moist and dry, works to decrease the number of soil pests, and reduces methane emission. This practice not only enhances agricultural production as an on-site benefit to the land users but also contributes to the off-site benefits enjoyed by downstream land users, since it helps to reduce sedimentation and increases water availability.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The biodynamic compost is prepared as a surface heap rather than in a traditional pit. The heap is built on a flat, dry site away from shade trees and other elements that would promote water logging. The farmer marks out a rectangular plot of land according to his needs and places a set of logs or PVC pipes lengthwise in the middle of the rectangle to facilitate air circulation and help aerate the pile. Alternating layers of dry and green biomass are added on top. Rock phosphate and crushed slaked lime are added to the middle layers to enhance decomposition and to supplement the mineral content. Once the layering is complete, the pile is sealed using a paste made from soil and cow dung. Over the ensuing two months, the pile is watered weekly (through holes made in the plaster layer which are then resealed) and is monitored; any cracks that appear in the external plaster are sealed. At the end of this time, the compost is tested to check if it is ready by taking samples from a few different locations in the heap. When a crushed sample smells like forest soil, it indicates that the degradation is 80% complete and that the compost is ready to use.

Location

Location: Lalitpur District, Nepal

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • n.a.

Spread of the Technology: applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: 10-50 years ago

Type of introduction
A biodynamic compost heap prepared by alternately layering dry and green biomass. (Samden L Sherpa)

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
  • Access to fertilizer
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping
  • Forest/ woodlandsProducts and services: Fuelwood, fodder

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
SLM group
  • integrated soil fertility management
SLM measures
  • management measures - M5: Control/ change of species composition

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Layering of the different materials in a biodynamic compost heap

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate (technicians as well)

Main technical functions: increase in organic matter, Increase Soil fertility and Productivity, Improve Physical condition of the soil

Secondary technical functions: increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, Improve the physical properties of the soil

Other type of management: Improve Compost Quality
Author: Layering of the different materials in a biodynamic compost heap

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology unit (unit: compost heap)
  • Currency used for cost calculation: NPR
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 71.0 NPR
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: n.a
Most important factors affecting the costs
All costs and amounts are rough estimates by the technicians and authors. Exchange rate USD 1 = NPR 71 in May 2011. This was a demonstration project conducted by ICIMOD.
Establishment activities
  1. include cow dung, crushed lime, rock phosphate (or bone meal), and dry and green farm matter. The compost heap is assembled in less than one day and the compost is ready to use within two months (under weather and temperature conditions similar to those at the ICIMOD Knowledge Park).Note: If rock phosphate is not available, crushed stone dust can besubstituted. (Timing/ frequency: 2 month)
Establishment inputs and costs (per compost heap)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (NPR) Total costs per input (NPR) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour unit 1.0 80.0 80.0
Equipment
Shovel, chopping machine, bucket, bamboo, rope unit 1.0 20.0 20.0
Construction material
cow dung kg/unit 300.0 0.1 30.0
lime and rock phosphate kg/unit 25.0 0.8 20.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 150.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 2.11
Maintenance activities
  1. The compost heap is punctured weekly in order to add water; after watering, the punctures are resealed using cow dung. (Timing/ frequency: weekly)
Maintenance inputs and costs (per compost heap)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (NPR) Total costs per input (NPR) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour unit 1.0 25.0 25.0
Construction material
Compost / manure unit 1.0 10.0 10.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 35.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 0.49

Natural environment

Average 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
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Thermal climate class: temperate
Slope
  • 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
Altitude
  • 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.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • 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)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Yes
  • No

Occurrence of flooding
  • Yes
  • No
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
  • government
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
roads and transport

poor
good
labour available

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
increased

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
decreased


Reduce expenses for purchasing chemical fertilizers

farm income
decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts
SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
improved


Improve knowledge on bio dynamic composting

Improve knowledge on soil conservation and soil fertility

Ecological impacts
soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
increased

Better compost encourages farmers to diversify crops to include mixed farming
discouraged
encouraged

Use of chemical fertilizers
increased
decreased

Off-site impacts
Environmentally friendly: keeps village cleaner by recycling waste matter
reduced
improved

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

The land user enjoys both short and long-term benefits; in the short term there is a reduced need for costly chemical/mineral fertilizers and in the long term the health of the soil improves. Locally available dry and green biomass can be used for making biodynamic compost. The only extra costs arise from the need for lime, rock phosphate, and labour.

Climate change

-

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Number of households and/ or area covered
Experiment
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Yes
  • No
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • The main advantage of this method is that the composting process is completed within 60 days, whereas the traditional method requires more than 120 days. The biodynamic compost itself is very fine and decomposition takes place uniformly from top to bottom in the heap.

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Share experiences with a wider audience and provide training to replicate the technology.
  • The quality of biodynamic compost is better than that of traditionally prepared compost. The nutrient content of N, P, K, and organic matter, and the C/N ratio, are higher

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Share experiences with a wider audience and provide training to replicate the technology.
  • This method is suitable for producing large amounts of compost

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? As above
  • Promotes organic production of desired crops and avoids the need for chemical fertilizers

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? As above
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Large amounts of biomass are not always available Rice and wheat straw can also be used if forest biomass is not easily available.
  • Rock phosphate is not always available crushed stone dust can be substituted.

References

Compiler
  • Shreedip Sigdel
Editors
Reviewer
  • David Streiff
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Aug. 7, 2015
Last update: June 4, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Biodynamic farming and compost preparation, Diver, S, 1999:
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International