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)

Community Agriculture and Watershed Management project in Tajikistan (WB / CAWMP)

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Contributing to biodiversity conservation and land rehabilitation in uplands through beekeeping.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

In general technological goals are achieved indirectly in two main ways: (1) bees carry pollen over long distances as hives are carried from one place to another and help to spread these melliferous (honey producing) plants to uplands; (2) planting melliferous herbs (mainly esparcet and lucerne) on degraded pastures and arable lands as well as intercropping melliferous herbs in orchards. Melliferous herbs improve soil structure, accumulate organic carbon and increase crop capacity of high-energy fodder crops. These types of herbs also help to reduce pressure on nearby (winter) pastures.

Purpose of the Technology: Bee-keeping contributes to a diversified use of natural resources. Indirectly the project activities helps the preservation of biodiversity and rehabilitation of degraded lands. Through the combination of these impacts rural livelihoods can be improved.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Purchase of hives, bee-families and specific equipment (frames, separators, etc)

Natural / human environment: Any regions of Tajikistan are suitable. Technology requires specific knowledge, which can be obtained from local associations of bee-farmers which have been set up in all regions of the country. Through the CAWMP project local associations of bee-farmers have increased their knowledge and skills and strengthened their potential. Therefore the population got access to products of traditional medicine – honey and other useful products.

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:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

Comments (type of project, etc.):

2006

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• preserve/ improve biodiversity

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):

• Agro-silvopastoralism

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): poor vegetation cover, lack of access to water resources in some regions

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): soil erosion, poor vegetation cover, lack of irrigation water

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: Yes

Improved pasture: Yes

Other grazingland: agro-silvo-pastoralism

3.4 Water supply

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

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

Comments:

Водопотребление: богарное, смешанное богарно-орошаемое

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• beekeeping, aquaculture, poultry, rabbit farming, silkworm farming, etc.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures, vegetative measures, management measures

Secondary measures: structural measures

Type of agronomic measures: better crop cover, mixed cropping / intercropping, legume inter-planting

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bh: loss of habitats, Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Main causes of degradation: overgrazing

Secondary causes of degradation: soil management, crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub), deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff), droughts, poverty / wealth, education, access to knowledge and support services, war and conflicts

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation

Comments:

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation, rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

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

other/ national currency (specify):

сомони

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Purchase of bee-hives and bee-families
2.	Preparing apiaries and hives
3.	Replacement of apiaries
4.	Purchase of specific beekeeping equipment
5.	Trainings on beekeeping
6.	Organization of purchases of materials, equipment and instruments
7.	Organization of seasonal transportation of apiaries
8.	Honey harvesting
9.	Sale of products and distribution of income

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	Labour	Persons/day	1.0	5.0	5.0	100.0
Equipment	Purchase of bee-hives and bee-families	hives	10.0	5.0	50.0
Equipment	Purchase of specific beekeeping equipment	kits	10.0	1.0	10.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					65.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					65.0

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Repair of hives
2.	Keeping bees
3.	Seasonal transportation of apiaries

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Length of vegetative season, harsh cold spells (dying of bees), pests and diseases, ways of transportation of apiary, number of places for localization of apiaries in vegetative period, distance and conditions of transportation, availability of markets and etc.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: Also 101-500 m a.s.l.

Landforms: Also ridges and plateau / plains

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

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	not well
local windstorm	not well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	not well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	not well

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)?

Comments:

With high market prices for this products it is a very beneficial investment

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

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

2584 households in an area of >10'000 km^2

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

• 0-10%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: Data are taken from the results of CAWMP project, even though it is known that this technology is more widely used. According to experts, 20-25 times more across Tajikistan.

Comments on spontaneous adoption: Information is not clear, but the technology is very popular in Tajikistan

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
improving public health
more money available

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Preservation and expansion of biodiversity in uplands How can they be sustained / enhanced? regular monitoring
additional fodder crops How can they be sustained / enhanced? expand lucerne and esparcet plantations
improving health of rural population
improving rural livelihoods

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?
high prices for specific equipment required for bee-farming	expand market of materials for bee-farming, stimulate domestic and small production of materials and tools
remoteness of melliferous areas

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Poor organizational structure used for transportation of beehives	develop associations of bee-farmers
lack of inventory of melliferous areas at national / regional level	governmental support to associations of bee-farmers in terms of inventory of melliferous areas

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Data Base of the Community agriculture and Watershed Management Project (Narzimurod Kholov, Rustam Rakhimov)

Available from where? Costs?

Dushanbe, Rudaki 44, CAWMP PMU, free