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)

Environmental Land Management and Rural Livelihoods (ELMAR)

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

International Center for Biosaline Agriculture in Central Asia and Caucasus (ICBA-CAC)

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

Tajik Academy of Agricultural Sciences (Tajik Academy of Agricultural Sciences) - Tajikistan

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

2013-2017

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?

No

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:

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:

• during experiments/ research
• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• 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

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

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• rotational systems (crop rotation, fallows, shifting cultivation)
• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• improved plant varieties/ animal breeds

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation
• adapt to land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	None	Management	None
2.	None	Agronomic	None
3.	None	Agronomic	None
4.	None	Agronomic	None
5.	None	Agronomic	None
6.	None	Agronomic	None

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	None	None	1.0	150.0	150.0
Labour	None	None	1.0	100.0	100.0
Labour	None	None	1.0	100.0	100.0
Labour	None	None	1.0	100.0	100.0
Equipment	None	None	80.0	6.7	536.0
Plant material	None	None	4.0	40.0	160.0
Fertilizers and biocides	None	None	10000.0	2.0	20000.0
Fertilizers and biocides	None	None	150.0	4.5	675.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					21821.0

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	None	Agronomic	None
2.	None	Agronomic	None
3.	None	Agronomic	None
4.	None	Agronomic	None
5.	None	Agronomic	None
6.	None	Agronomic	None
7.	None	Agronomic	None

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	None	None	20.0	30.0	600.0	100.0
Labour	None	None	2.0	100.0	200.0	100.0
Labour	None	None	1.0	250.0	250.0
Labour	None	None	2.0	100.0	200.0	100.0
Equipment	None	None	10.0	25.0	250.0	100.0
Equipment	None	None	40.0	6.7	268.0
Fertilizers and biocides	None	None	150.0	3.5	525.0
Fertilizers and biocides	None	None	150.0	4.0	600.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					2893.0

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?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

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
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• 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

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

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

	Season	Type of climatic change/ extreme	How does the Technology cope with it?
seasonal temperature	summer	increase	very well
seasonal rainfall	spring	increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	well
local hailstorm	moderately
local sandstorm/ duststorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
heatwave	very well
drought	very well

Biological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
insect/ worm infestation	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

• 1-10%

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

• 0-10%

6.6 Adaptation

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

Yes

If yes, indicate to which changing conditions it was adapted:

• climatic change/ extremes

7.1 Methods/ sources of information