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)

Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling out Sustainable Land Management (GEF-FAO / DS-SLM)

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

Royaume du Maroc, Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte Contre la Désertification (Royaume du Maroc) - Morocco

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

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Il s'agit de planter des jeunes plants d'espèces forestières locales (arganier) mais aussi des espèces adaptées aux conditions écologiques concernées (exemple Pinus halepensis).

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Augmentation de la densité des peuplements d'arganier ouverts et dégradés par des jeunes plants issus de pépinière forestière.
les principales opérations :
- Ouverture de potets de 60*60*60cm à raison de 200 plants/ha.
- Rebouchage des troues.
- Plantation des plants.
- Arrosage (15 fois aux besoins).
- Regarnis la deuxième année.
- Désherbage / binage.
- Compensation du droit de parcours jusqu'à la défensabilité des plants (10 à 12 ans).

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:

2015

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:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)
• through projects/ external interventions

• Convention HCEFLCD-ANDZOA

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Projets décinnaux de reconstitution des forêts menés par l'état.
Programme de reconstitutions des formations autochtones à base d’arganier dans le cadre du contrat programme DREFLCD-SO/HCEFLCD.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• conserve ecosystem
• protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• mitigate climate change and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact

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

Comments:

Les périmètres de reboisement sont interdits à tout usage.

Number of growing seasons per year: 1

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

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

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Surpâturage, surexploitation des ressources ligneuses.

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• USD

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

9.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Clôture	Septembre
2.	Ouverture des potes	Octobre
3.	Rebouchage des trous et compost	Novembre
4.	Acheminement des plants	Novembre
5.	Plantations	Novembre/Décembre
6.	Regarnis
7.	Entretiens des plants
8.	Arrosages

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Ouverture des potets	potet	20000.0	1.0	20000.0
Labour	Rebouchage des plantations	potet	20000.0	1.0	20000.0
Equipment	Clôture	ml	160.0	1000.0	160000.0
Plant material	Acheminement des plants	Plant	20000.0	0.1	2000.0
Plant material	Regarnis	Plan	5000.0	0.1	500.0
Other	Arrosage	Plant	20000.0	3.0	60000.0
Other	Entretiens	Plan	20000.0	0.1	2000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					264500.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					29388.89

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

L'état.

Comments:

La technologie totalement prise complétement par l'état.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Arrosage (durant 2 ans)	Juillet - Août - Septembre
2.	Binage et désherbage (durant 2 ans)	Mars - Avril
3.	Regamis	Février à septembre durant la 2ème année

4.6 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	Compensation de la mise en défens	ha	100.0	25.0	2500.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					2500.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					277.78

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

L'état.

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?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

La technologie exclue actuellement les utilisations des terres habituelles jusqu'à la défensabilité.

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

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

Land ownership:

• state

Land use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

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

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

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	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
seasonal temperature	spring	decrease	moderately
seasonal rainfall	spring	decrease	moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	moderately

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	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%

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

C'est la communauté qui accepte la technologie.

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

• 51-90%

Comments:

Technologie appliquée par les services de l'état.

6.6 Adaptation

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

Yes

Specify adaptation of the Technology (design, material/ species, etc.):

Augmenter les conditions de réussite des plantations.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Usagers sont peu favorables en raison de l'exclusion du droit de pâturage en zone plantée.
L'état doit assurer des alternatifs ou des mesures plus interressantes à la compensation des ressources fouragères tirés des zones reboisées.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Technologie nécessaire pour la reconstitution et la durabilité des forêts d'arganier en particulier.
Développer l'approche participative avec les usgaers.

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?
Contraignante pour les activités des usagers.	Concertation et encouragements des usagers.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Difficultés de réussir la technologie.	Implication et faire adhérer les usagers pour la mise en place de la technologie.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information