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)

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

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

14/11/2012

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Trees are planted along the riparian zone to stabilize the riverbank and to prevent degradation. The wood can be used to establish a building or to generate income on the market.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

At the foot slopes of Mt. Kenya a farmer has developed a technology to protect the own land plot from riverbank erosion. The technology consists of three main measures: A wall along the riverbed, trees that are aligned on the wall as well as beside it and Napier grass wildly scattered between the trees. The wall was built on a highly exposed spot of the riverbank. Trees along and beside the wall ensure its stability. The combination of the two measures results in an effective protection of the riverbank in terms of erosion. Side effects of the technology are higher runoff during the dry season, better water quality due to less erosion and an improved riparian habitat for animals and plants.

Purpose of the Technology: For a small scale farmer, planting of trees can have advantages in an economic, an ecologic and an aesthetic point of view. The trees stabilize the soil, allow the riparian vegetation to establish, and prevent major damages through flooding. Furthermore, there are several advantages of an intact riparian zone, such as enhanced biodiversity, increased water quality as well as retention of agrochemicals. The trees also work as a kind of bank account, since the prices for wood are quite high. Trees can be cut and sold from time to time to generate an income that can be used for further investments like local entrepreneurship or building houses for family members. Last but not least, the farmer emphasized the beautiful appearance of the trees including the relatively cool micro- climate the trees are able to provide during the hot months of the dry period.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The trees were planted during the rainy season. Braches are pruned regularly and provide mulch material as well as fire wood. When trees are reaching maturity they will selectively be cut and replanted. The Napier grass is cut regularly for fodder to be feed to animals. At this particular time, there is a regular hay yield (weed). Seedlings for trees and the grasses are produced on site. Occasional pruning ensures fuel wood supply.

Natural / human environment: The plot is situated at the western side of Mt. Kenya in its foot zone, a moderate hilly region. Actually, the foot zone is a transition area between the humid mountain forest above elevations of 2500 m.a.s.l and the semi-arid savannah zone below 2000 m a.s.l. Although the region is located in the rain shadow of Mt. Kenya, there is just enough precipitation (740mm) to sustain rain fed agriculture and the farmers even benefit from a water project. During the last decades, the region has experienced a still continuing population growth which increases population pressure in the area. The good accessibility and the moderate tourism allow even off-farm income-generation.

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

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The land user has enough space to afforest along the riparian. The main goals are to stabilise the riparian soil and to produce wood for use in the future.

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Surface water pollution and riverbank degradation as well as a diminished habitat of riparian flora and fauna.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): An unstable riparian zone being eroded by the river and unattractive aesthetics.

Problems / comments regarding forest use: The purpose of the forest is mainly in a protective way. Later on, as soon as the trees are large enough, selective felling for construction is planned.

Forest products and services: timber, fuelwood, nature conservation / protection, recreation / tourism

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Forests / woodlands: Fp: Plantations, afforestations

If land use has changed due to the implementation of the Technology, indicate land use before implementation of the Technology:

Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

3.3 Further information about land use

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 90 Longest growing period from month to month: april to may Second longest growing period in days: 90 Second longest growing period from month to month: october to november

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• natural and semi-natural forest management
• improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:

• < 0.1 km2 (10 ha)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures

Secondary measures: structural measures

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -linear, scattered / dispersed

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wr: riverbank erosion, Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline, Hp: decline of surface water quality

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion, Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Hw: reduction of the buffering capacity of wetland areas

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use, population pressure, education, access to knowledge and support services

Secondary causes of degradation: floods

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Indigenous trees, a wall and Napier grass are installed between the agricultural land and the river. The wall prevents erosion at a very endangered spot. The trees and the grass provide fodder and wood.

Location: Naro Moru. Nyeri / Central Province

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: low

Main technical functions: increase of infiltration, improvement of water quality, buffering / filtering water, sediment retention / trapping, sediment harvesting, stabilization of riverbank by trees and grasses

Secondary technical functions: stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides)

Aligned: -linear
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 200
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 0
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 1.5
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 2

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: G : grass
Number of plants per (ha): 800

Trees/ shrubs species: Cypress, Grevillea, indigenous trees

Fruit trees / shrubs species: Napier grass

Wall/ barrier
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.5m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 2m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 10m

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology unit

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• US Dollars

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Setting up a tree nursery	Vegetative
2.	Planting seedlings	Vegetative	during rainy season
3.	Establishment of wall	Structural

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Setting up a tree nursery	Persons/day	5.0	3.3333	16.67	100.0
Labour	Planting seedlings	Persons/day	25.0	3.3333	83.33	100.0
Labour	Establishment of wall	Persons/day	5.0	3.3333	16.67	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					116.67

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Replanting trees that dried up	Vegetative
2.	Cutting the Napier grass and pruning trees	Vegetative	during the rainy seasons = 4 months a year. 3 times a month

4.7 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	Replanting trees	Persons/day	3.0	3.3333	10.0	100.0
Labour	Cutting the Napier grass and pruning trees	Persons/day	12.0	3.33333	40.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					50.0

Comments:

Establishment has been carried out over a time period of 5 years. Considering this time frame, the establishment costs are smaller than the maintenance costs.
The costs per hectare were calculated for a riparian area with the length of 100 m and a width of 10 m, since hectares are difficult to apply in a riparian context. The determining factor for the costs is labour. In this case, the labour costs are quite high because the seedlings were produced in the own nursery. This explains the high labour costs. Some of the seedlings had to be replanted, because they dried up. The required equipment like a spade is available on nearly every farm or can be borrowed from neighbours and is thus not added to the costs.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 2020

Slopes on average: Land plot has a slope between 5% and 9%

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 texture: mixture, because it is not red

Soil fertility is high

Soil drainage / infiltration is good

Soil water storage capacity very low - low

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Ground water table: <5 mjust along the river, deeper ground water level 50-100m

Water quality (untreated): From a water project

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Species diversity: Also medium

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

Difference in the involvement of women and men: A clan uses the land commonly. Besides the base family (mother, father, son), the grandmother and an uncle use parts of the land. All of them apply the protective technologies in the riparian.

Population density: 200-500 persons/km2

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology

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

Land ownership:

• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Comments:

Mostly small scale farmers are using the land.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

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	Type of climatic change/ extreme	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	well
local windstorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	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

• single cases/ experimental

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

1 household

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

• 90-100%

Comments:

Comments on acceptance with external material support: The WRUA has been distributing seedlings among the riparian farmers. Quantification is not possible.

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

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
There is a recreational aspect of the riparian zone. Especially during hot days the farmer is enjoying the slightly colder temperatures because of the canopy and the cooling stream. The aesthetic aspects of the riparian are also enhanced. How can they be sustained / enhanced? If the canopy of the riparian is maintained, it can serve still as recreation area and convince with beautiful looks.
Long term benefits in terms of wood and timber provided by the trees. How can they be sustained / enhanced? If trees are not chopped too early, they will have a good price on the market.
The maintenance of the riparian is not tiring and still gives a good harvest. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Benefits can be sustained by continuing the management practices.
Diversification: Formerly, there was maize at the river, but it died due to cold temperatures. Forests do not die due to frost. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Every plant has its special needs that should be kept in mind.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Wood production through selective felling is sustainable. How can they be sustained / enhanced? No widespread felling of trees, only selective intervention.
Fodder production enables the keeping of cattle. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Before dry periods, some fodder should be stored to ensure fodder supplies.

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?
There is less crop yield, because an area of the plot was formerly used for maize production and now it is part of the riparian.	The productive and protective benefits of the riparian overcome decreased size of the agricultural plot.