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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling out Sustainable Land Management (GEF-FAO / DS-SLM)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 155, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland', 'template': 'raw'}

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:

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Le recours aux plantations d’arbustes fourragers aura lieu généralement si la dégradation a atteint le seuil d’irréversibilité. La plantation des arbustes est faite dans le but :
- Soit de combler un déficit dans le bilan fourrager annuel qui de la diffi-culté d »alimenter les troupeaux et qui se pose en général à la fin de l’année (fin d’automne et durant tout l’hiver).
- Soit pour la sauvegarde du cheptel en cas de sécheresse ou disette
- De conservation des eaux et des sols

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Les principaux arbustes fourragers utilisés au Centre – Sud de la Tunisie sont : Acacia cyanophylla, Atriplex nummularia et A. halimus, Opuntia ficus indica var. inermis si l’on peut considérer comme arbuste. Ces espèces ont donné des résultats spéctaculaires au Centre du pays elles ont par contre échoué dans le Sud en raison de l’aridité extrême. Ce n’est que ces dernières années que le recours aux espèces locales, plus adaptées aux conditions difficiles, comme Periploca angustifolia, Rhus tripartitum, Retama raetam a pris de l’ampleur.
Dans les parcours collectifs, les services forestiers se chargent à travers des chantiers de l’irrigation et de l’entretien des plantations. Au niveau des par-cours privés, l’Office d’Elevage et des Pâturages se charge d’apporter les plants et fournir des subventions au bénéficiaire qui se charge de toutes les opérations d’entretien et de protection.
L’exploitation par pacage direct ou recolte (cas du cactus) se fait après 3 à 4 ans pendant les périodes de soudure et de sécheresse.

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:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through land users' innovation
• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• reduce risk of disasters
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts

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:

• rainfed

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• pastoralism and grazing land 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:

• 0.1-1 km2

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:

• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

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
2.	None	Management
3.	None	Agronomic
4.	None	Vegetative
5.	None	Management

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	20.0	10.0	200.0
Plant material	None		1.0	300.0	300.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					500.0

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	None	Agronomic
2.	None	Agronomic
3.	None	Management

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	1.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
Labour	None	None	1.0	100.0	100.0
Labour	None	None	1.0	100.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					300.0

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Yes

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:

• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• individual

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

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	moderately
annual rainfall		decrease	moderately

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?

• 10-50%

6.6 Adaptation

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

No

7.1 Methods/ sources of information