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

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

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

Land distribution and allocation for riverbed farming [Nepal]

Riverbed farming provides landless and land-poor households with the possibility to earn an income from on-farm activities close to home

• Compiler: Shreedip Sigdel
• 08/25/2015 midnight

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Riverbed farming can be used to increase household income and to improve the food security of landless and land-poor households in the Terai area of Nepal.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

It is estimated that about 8,000 hectares of riverbed land would be suitable for agricultural cultivation in the Kailali and Kanchanpur Districts in the Western Terai areas of Nepal. After the river water recedes in the post-monsoon season, vegetables are planted in ditches dug into the seasonal sand banks; the crops are harvested before the onset of the next monsoon. In 2006, Elam Plus of HELVETAS Swiss Inter-cooperation Nepal, assessed local practices of riverbed farming and piloted an improved approach with 670 farmers, mostly from the indigenous Tharu community. During the first year they cultivated 43 hectares. Since the initial results indicated that riverbed farming could increase the target population’s income significantly, the programme was expanded from the initial two districts (Kailali and Kanchanpur) to two new districts (Banke, and Bardiya). The number of households was increased to 2000 in 2008 and 3165 in 2012 after the initiative won a Global Development Market Place award from the World Bank.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Requirements for riverbed farming:
• On average, the water table should not be lower than 1 m; when the water table is lower than this, too much labour is required.
• Plots are allocated perpendicular to the river flow in order to give each farmer access to a variety of land types (and moisture levels) suitable for different crops.
• Ditches are up to 1 m deep and 1 m wide. The length depends on how much land is available.
• A row-to-row spacing of 2–3 m (between the ditches) and plant-to-plant spacing of 0.5–1 m is required depending on the crop.
• The ditches are dug in an east-west orientation to maximize the amount of sunshine they receive and to minimise the collection of sand carried by the prevailing winds.
• Riverbed farmers can build shelters close to their plots so that they can be close at hand to fend off thieves and wild animals.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• create beneficial economic impact
• create beneficial social impact

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

Cropland

• Annual cropping

Annual cropping - Specify crops:

• vegetables - other

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Specify:

Longest growing period from month to month: November to May

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Rivers in the Terai region change their course frequently and when they do, the adjacent lands are flooded. The riverbeds are flooded annually, while the riverbanks are only flooded during extreme events. The annually flooded riverbeds are seasonally dry (from September to May) and are a generally unused land resource. Landless and land- poor farmers can use this land to cultivate seasonal vegetables that are adapted to the environmental conditions prevalent on riverbeds.

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover

• use different type of land for cultivation

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

• A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility

structural measures

• S3: Graded ditches, channels, waterways

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

• Wr: riverbank erosion

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: floods

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

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

4.3 Establishment activities

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

All costs and amounts are rough estimates by the technicians and authors.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

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 fertility is medium

Soil drainage / infiltration is good

Soil water storage capacity is low

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Ground water table: 30-50 m

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 200-500 persons/km2

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

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

• landless

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

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

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Hydrological disasters

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

Comments:

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: The majority of riverbed farmers among the first few groups to learn the technique continued riverbed farming after support for the project ended. In the third year, 55 of the original 61 groups were still farming on the riverbed even though they did not receive any agricultural inputs with the exception of support from the local resource persons. The local resource persons have organized themselves into an independent organisation that now provides technical support through the Micro Enterprise Development Fund and through individual channels. Now that Nepali farmers have started to farm the riverbeds in the Kailali and Kanchanpur Districts, the number of Indian farmers who previously farmed these riverbeds has drastically diminished.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Riverbed farming manual and local resource person training modules. Kathmandu, Nepal, HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation Nepal