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

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

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland

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

NCCR North-South (NCCR North-South) - Kyrgyzstan

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)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Establishment of an orchard intercropping system on severely degraded cropland.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

A fruit orchard (consisting of apples, apricots, cherries, pears and nut trees) was established on degraded cropland. Intercropping of annual crops such as wheat, flax, chick peas and vegetables as well as perennial herbaceous fodder plants (alfa-alfa and esparzet) were planted after the first year of the establishment of the orchard. Only the onion plot is rotated systematically since the farmer states that fertility declines due to heavy soil losses result from over-irrigation. Spacing of tree rows varies between 8-10m, the intercropping system is cultivated using a tractor. Fruit trees are aligned in the direction of the slope to facilitate irrigation. At the top of the field an irrigation channel (40cm wide, 15cm deep) stabilised with aligned poplar trees directs water onto the orchard system. During the rainy season the channel serves as a cut-off drain, protecting the land from water running on. Along the trees, a 2.5 m wide grass strip protects the ground from splash erosion.

Purpose of the Technology: The orchard system was established to increase farm production by integrating different resources, while simultaneously conserving soil and water resources and preventing development of gullies. Prior to tree planting, the area had been levelled with a bulldozer to restore the severely degraded cropland. The bought seedlings were planted in hand-dug pits. During summer, the orchard system is watered three days per week; manure is applied around the fruit trees on an annual basis. Pruning of the trees is done in early spring. Due to irrigation, the grass strips can be harvested twice a year for haymaking. Farming two crops at a time means gross farm production could be considerably increased, which is the reaon why the farmer considered the technology successful. However, establishment and maintenance of the technology is cost intensive and, in this case study, was only affordable due to the farmers off-farm income. Since the tree rows are aligned up and down the slope, soil erosion is solely reduced by the capability of the irrigation channel (and aligned tree barrier) to prevent the system from runon. Planting tree rows on the gradient would increase the technologies potential to reduce soil loss.

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:

• during experiments/ research

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Severe water erosion (gullies and rills) and subsequent decline in fertility on cropland and on overgrazed pastures.

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: If the land is irrigated, then after the harvest of annual crops (mid-July until beginning of August), and there is immediate sowing/planting of vegetables (maize, tomatoes, cucumbers, melon among others), then the harvest of vegetables in late August and September is possible.

3.4 Water supply

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

• full irrigation

Comments:

Water supply also rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: structural measures

Secondary measures: agronomic measures, vegetative measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, manure / compost / residues, mineral (inorganic) fertilizers

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

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.	land levelling and filling up of gullies	winter/early spring
2.	digging of irrigation channel	spring
3.	acquiring tree seedlings on market or at sovkhoze
4.	digging of pits	early spring
5.	planting seedlings in pits	early spring
6.	sowing of esparzet and alfa alfa (grass strips) to get intact grass cover	spring

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	land levelling	ha	1.0	45.0	45.0	100.0
Equipment	tools	ha	1.0	25.0	25.0	100.0
Equipment	machine for land levelling	ha	1.0	150.0	150.0
Plant material	seedlings	ha	1.0	250.0	250.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					470.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					470.0

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	clearing of irigation channel/cut-off drain from washed in soil	rainy season/weekly
2.	periodical irrigation (3x a week)	summer /three days/week
3.	periodical irrigation (3x a week)	summer /three days/week
4.	application of manure	early spring /annual
5.	application of manure	early spring /annual
6.	application of pesticides	spring /annual
7.	application of pesticides	spring /annual
8.	pruning of fruit trees	winter/early spring /annual
9.	pruning of fruit trees	winter/early spring /annual
10.	cutting of grass (haymaking)	summer /twice a cropping season
11.	cutting of grass (haymaking)	summer /twice a cropping season
12.	ploughing of area between tree rows (disc plough)	depending on crop / annual
13.	applying of mineral fertilisers	spring / annual (only for intercropped wheat)
14.	weeding	spring / regularly
15.	applying manure around fruit trees	winter/spring /annual

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	ploughing of area	ha	1.0	20.0	20.0	100.0
Labour	sowing and weeding	ha	1.0	18.0	18.0
Labour	pruning of fruit trees	ha	1.0	30.0	30.0
Labour	spraying trees with biocides	ha	1.0	12.0	12.0
Plant material	seeds	ha	1.0	30.0	30.0	100.0
Plant material				1.0
Fertilizers and biocides	fertilizer	ha	1.0	50.0	50.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	biocides	ha	1.0	10.0	10.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	compost/manure	ha	1.0	40.0	40.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					210.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					210.0

Comments:

Costs were calculated for a 100x100 m field plot (with a projected 200 fruit trees/ha).

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Number of trees planted: since the establishment and maintainance require considerable financial and labour inputs; expenditures for tree seedlings bought from the market: N.B. if nursing the trees is completed by land user himself, establishment costs can be halved.

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: medium

Soil drainage / infiltration: medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

5% of the land users are rich and own 15% of the land.
75% of the land users are average wealthy and own 70% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: In general, all farmers (including those applying SWC technologies) are highly dependent on off-farm incomes, which in most cases are earned in Russia, either by themselves or by their relatives.

Market orientation of production system subsistence (self-supply): Subsistence, only surpluses sold

Level of mechanization: Ploughing is carried out by tractor whenever possible, but also animal traction is existent.

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:

• leased

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Climate and disaster risk reduction

Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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

• > 50%

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

20 households in an area of 0.1 - 1 km2

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

• 91-100%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

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

Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
increase in overall farm income
prevention of gully and large rill erosion

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
orchard system is protected from runon
effectively prevents formation of gullies and large rills
significant increases in gross farm production
effective way of rehabilitating bad lands
increases soil fertility How can they be sustained / enhanced? consequent mulching would increase the organic matter content of the soil, and hence soil fertility

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?
fruit trees vulnerable to pests, frost and strong winds

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
high establishment and maintainance costs	if nursing of tree seedlings is carried out by the land user himself, establishment costs can be reduced
does not prevent soil erosion, soil losses especially where irrigated	By planting tree rows on gradient (not up and down the slope)
management of orchard systems requires considerable inputs which often cannot be afforded by poor people

7.1 Methods/ sources of information