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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 2, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Book project: where people and their land are safer - A Compendium of Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (where people and their land are safer)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 557, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CARITAS (Switzerland) - Switzerland', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

11/10/2016

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

Yes

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?

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The river training dam is a disaster mitigation structure protecting downstream areas from flash floods and mudflows. It consists of a channel dug and wire net gabions built to train the river and is hence cheap to establish and maintain. There is a substantial community contribution as labour is an important part of the input costs. The dam enables the rehabilitation of unproductive land in the downstream catchment areas, reduction of crop pests, increase in crop diversity and land productivity, and an overall improvement of livelihoods for downstream communities through reduced vulnerability to disasters.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The river training dam is a disaster mitigation structure constructed in the middle zone of the watershed of Obishur (Southern Tajikistan), at 1400 metres above sea level. It is diverting the water from the river fan naturally flowing through Kulchashma village into a different direction and river outlet (Yakhsu river). The dike is a simple structure consisting of a 400m-long and 4m-high channel dug by bulldozer consolidated by a 60m-long and 3m-wide gabion protecting a sharp curve of the river. The material needed is limited to stones and wire net, and the construction as well as maintenance costs are hence low and don't need a too high amount of labour, provided by the communities as in-kind contribution. The structure is built to resist a pressure of up to 72 m3/sec. Given the annual frequency and strength of the local floods, the Kulchashma river training dam has an estimated life expectancy of 30 years. The land users proposed to establish the dam in order to protect the 250 households and 270 ha of land downstream being regularly affected by the floods. In particular, people, houses, roads and other infrastructure, crop and pasture land as well as animals and other assets were highly exposed to the risk of flood. The agricultural production, constituting the main part of people’s income was hindered by the regular occurrence of disasters. The establishment of the river training dam resulted in the rehabilitation of unproductive land in the river fan and its use as pasture and arable land which the community mainly uses for agroforestry. The occurrence of crop pests decreased, the crop diversity was increased, the crop and land productivity improved, thereby enhancing the land users’ food security and overall income. The dam also allowed vulnerable community members to access land and build houses. The construction of buildings behind the dam is however risky and communities tend to forget or ignore that a risk of failure of the dam persists, and that its life expectancy is limited. But first of all, the personal safety of the community members is now improved and they are happy to be able to sleep without the fear of regular floods.

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

Indicate year of implementation:

2014

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through land users' innovation

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The adoption of the technology was proposed by the land users.

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
• reduce risk of disasters
• create beneficial economic impact

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

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

Unproductive land (river fan regularly inundated by water and sediment flows)

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

Comments:

Irrigation - main irrigation channels also received water diverted by the dam.

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Specify:

Cultivation of fruit and fuelwood trees, wheat, perennial fodder crops (lucerne, esparcet), onions, potatoes.

Livestock density (if relevant):

about 5 cows/ha.

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• water diversion and drainage

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

Comments:

The dam was built in the middle zone of the watershed at a narrow part of the river (natural compression of the river) in order to reach highest possible cost-effectiveness ratio.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Improvement of groundwater quality is not the focus of the project but the technology has an impact on this type of natural degradation process.

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

Comments:

Flood sediments are diverted by the dam and its accumulation in the lower zone of the watersheds is prevented, thereby allowing the rehabilitation of arable land downstream.

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

n/a

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.	400m-long channel digging (bulldozer)	Structural	August-October
2.	Stone collection	Structural	October (10 days)
3.	Construction of gabions	Structural	November (15 days)

Comments:

Establishment activities to be completed before the cold and snow/rain season.

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	Construction of wire net gabions	person-hours	1400.0	1.5	2100.0	100.0
Labour	Bulldozer driving	person-hours	150.0	1.5	225.0
Equipment	Bulldozer rent	day	15.0	63.0	945.0
Equipment	Fuel for bulldozer	litre	2250.0	1.35	3037.5
Equipment	Diesel oil for bulldozer	litre	68.0	2.13	144.84
Equipment	Spindle oil for bulldozer	litre	45.0	2.0	90.0
Construction material	wire net (diametre 4mm)	m2	625.0	1.6	1000.0
Construction material	wire (diametre 3mm)	kg	26.0	1.6	41.6
Other	Gearbox oil for bulldozer	litre	22.0	2.5	55.0
Other	Solid oil for bulldozer	litre	22.0	3.0	66.0
Other	Gas for bulldozer	litre	22.0	1.4	30.8
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					7735.74

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

Rent of bulldozer + bulldozer driving covered by local district government. All other costs covered by project.

Comments:

Cost-sharing for establishment and maintenance activities is agreed upon when determining the design and implementation of the dam as part of the project conditions.

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Fixing of wire net gabions	Structural	March, annually

Comments:

Maintenance activities to be conducted before peak rain/snowmelt/flood season.

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	Fixing wire net (by Self Help Group)	hour	40.0	0.8	32.0	100.0
Construction material	wire net	kg	7.0	1.0	7.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					39.0

Comments:

All maintenance costs covered by land users.

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

- Geography (steep hills to dig a diverting channel increases the establishment costs)
- Geology (quality/type of soil affects the time needed for digging)

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

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.

On southern (sunny) side of the hills, loess type of soil. On northern (shady) side of the hills, humus type of soil

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Seasonal floods/high runoff in spring time, when heavy rain coincides with snowmelt.

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

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:

• state

Land use rights:

• leased

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

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

Other socio-economic impacts

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

Comments regarding impact assessment:

In the last three years no flood affected the downstream village. 330ha of land situated downstream of the dam has been rehabilitated, cleaned from big stones, and used fully as pasture. No sediment flood affected the use of this rehabilitated land.

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 rainfall		increase	well
seasonal rainfall	spring	increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Hydrological disasters

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

From the land-user perspective, the benefit assessment of the establishment costs could only be done in relation to the land-users' contribution (i.e. 10% of establishment costs in cash or USD 600 , plus labour).
Because the dam was constructed less than 10 years ago, the long-terms returns cannot be assessed yet.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• more than 50%

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

250 households and 270 ha covered, i.e. 50% of Kulchashma village's population.

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

• 0-10%

Comments:

This low percentage is explained by the fact that a structural measure like a dam construction is a big collective investment and can only be initiated as a group with coordination.

6.6 Adaptation

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

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The construction and maintenance of a river training dam prevents further land degradation caused by floods, allows the rehabilitation of unused land to create new pastures, and above all increases people's and livestock's safety.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
General improvement of life quality, including life safety and opportunities to protect assets and improve livelihoods.

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?
None	n/a

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Downstream communities feel safe behind the dam and tend to ignore the risk of failure in extreme conditions (beyond the coping capacity of the dam). As a consequence, people build houses in places still at risk in the river fan.	Strengthened governance (no authorisation of construction in the river fan/behind the dam in the risk zone).

7.1 Methods/ sources of information