This is an outdated, inactive version of this case. Go to the current version.
Technologies
Inactive

Phytopesticides [Tajikistan]

Biopesticides

technologies_1064 - Tajikistan

View sections

Expand all Collapse all
Completeness: 76%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': "Sa'dy Odinashoev", 'user_id': '1816', 'unknown_user': False, 'template': 'raw'}
SLM specialist:
{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': "Sa'dy Odinashoev", 'user_id': '1816', 'unknown_user': False, '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'} {'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

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Using environmentally friendly phytopesticides, made from natural plant extracts to help combat pests and diseases.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Phytopesticides are made mainly from plants, including; potatoes, onions or tomato stalks as well as from garlic, pepper, dandelion, common wormwood and thorn apple extracts. Other biological pesticides can be produced from ash or soap. Phytopesticides can be stored for up to a year.

Purpose of the Technology: The overall goal of phytopesticides is to combat pests and diseases, using an environmentally friendly, natural method without the need for chemical pesticides. They do not affect the surrounding flora and fauna and preserve biological organisms in the soil.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: This is an easy-to-use and low-cost technology, which mainly requires the collection and drying of plant parts to make the pesticides.

Natural / human environment: The technology can be used in any environment during the growing period. The technology is currently used in arid zones in the South of Tajikistan, in Dehkan farms as well as on other farmlands.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

Media Gallery

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

Country:

Tajikistan

Region/ State/ Province:

Tajikistan

Further specification of location:

Khatlon District, Nosiri Husrav region

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • < 0.1 km2 (10 ha)
Map preview

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

  • Traditional

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • conserve ecosystem

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):
  • Agroforestry

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
  • tomato
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Specify:

Longest growing period from month to month: In the course of the growing period

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): This technology allows avoidance of the use of chemical pesticides. Phyto pesticides do not destroy the organic matter in the soil, in fact they enrich the soil and are evironmentally friendly.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): As above

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
Comments:

Water supply: Also full irrigation

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • integrated soil fertility management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A1: Vegetation/ soil cover
Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bp: increase of pests/ diseases, loss of predators
Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bp: increase of pests / diseases, loss of predators

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:

Основная цель: реабилитация / восстановление голых земель, предотвращение / сокращение деградации

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': None, 'preview_image': '', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': None, 'template': 'raw'}
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: Preservation of biohumus in soil, Enrichment of bioorganisms in soil, Decrease of pests

Agronomic measure: phytopesticides
Material/ species: potato, onion or tomato stalks, garlic, pepper, dandelion, common wormwood and thorn apple

Vegetative measure: Preservation of micro-organisms in soil
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs, F : fruit trees / shrubs, C : perennial crops, G : grass, O : other

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs, F : fruit trees / shrubs, C : perennial crops, G : grass, O : other

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs, F : fruit trees / shrubs, C : perennial crops, G : grass, O : other

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs, F : fruit trees / shrubs, C : perennial crops, G : grass, O : other

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify currency used for cost calculations:
  • USD

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Production of pesticedes 3 hours

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 Production of pesticides liter 100.0 0.03 3.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 3.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 3.0

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Preparation of materials 1 person/day
2. Spraying 1 person/day
3. Purchase of sprayer 1

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 Preparation of materials kg 1.0 1.0 1.0 100.0
Labour Spraying liter 100.0 0.03 3.0 100.0
Equipment Purchase of sprayer pieces 2.0 25.0 50.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 54.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 54.0

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Expenditures for the purchase of sprayer

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • arid

Thermal climate class: temperate

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • low (<1%)
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 low

Soil drainage / infiltration is medium

Soil water storage capacity is very low

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

< 5 m

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water: good, medium

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • subsistence (self-supply)
Off-farm income:
  • > 50% of all income
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
  • mechanized/ motorized
Gender:
  • women
  • men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Population density: 50-100 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 2% - 3%

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

  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • medium-scale

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

Land ownership:
  • group
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)
Water use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

crop production

decreased
increased

product diversity

decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency

reduced
improved

health situation

worsened
improved

Ecological impacts

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

habitat diversity

decreased
increased

pest/ disease control

decreased
increased

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?
annual temperature increase well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm well
local windstorm well
Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought well
Hydrological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences
How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period not known

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

very positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

very positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • > 50%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

80 households in an area of 10 ha

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 51-90%
Comments:

40 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

60% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

40 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The technology is acceptable
The technology is environmentally friendly

How can they be sustained / enhanced? The technology replaces chemical pesticides with environmentally friendly ones.
Low cost

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Phytopesticides can be produced at any time

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Phytopesticides are effective for only two weeks Pesticides can be prepared and used at any time

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules