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)

ICARDA Institutional Knowledge Management Initiative

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

International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) - Lebanon

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

This technology is based on the natural advantages and the multi-purpose usage of spineless cactus pear (Opuntia fiscus-indica), to cultivate marginal lands in Jordan, generating environmental and socio-economic benefits.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

In the arid parts of Jordan with limited rainfall, little irrigation, high water evaporation, poor soil quality and unsustainable land management result in land degradation (erosion and salinization) and productivity loss. Therefore, the International Center Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) and National Agricultural Research Centre of Jordan (NARC) organized field days (started in 2014) to disseminate knowledge regarding the cultivation of the cactus pear, Opuntia ficus-indica, cactus crop. Cacti can cope with high temperatures and grow well in (semi)-arid areas with 250-600mm annual rainfall or where irrigation is available. Additionally, the plant is very resilient as it can withstand a long dry season due to its high water-content and water-use -efficiency, which are a result of its morphology (waxy cuticle, no actual leaves) and the Crassulacean Acid Metabolism (CAM). In CAM plant, stomata in the leaves remain shut during the day to reduce evapotranspiration, but open at night to collect and fix carbon dioxide (CO2). In general, cacti have multiple products that benefit local livelihoods, these are for example stable production of fodder for livestock and fruits for human consumption. Also, cactus can grow and produce requiring few inputs such as fertilizers, therefore marginal lands are well suited for cactus cultivation.

The market for cactus fruits is very promising in Jordan. Nowadays, there is high demand for cactus fruits as people grow fond of the fruits but also for medicinal uses. This documentation is focused on a farm covering roughly 10 hectares, where cactus was planted due to its socio-economic and environmental advantages i.e. the high prices for cactus fruits and the ability of cactus to grow in marginal lands with little input and cover the soil hence preventing soil erosion. However, the farm is not located ideally for cactus cultivation. Therefore, the farm is currently intensively managed in terms of fertilizer application and the irrigation. The previous land use was poor cultivation of barley to feed (grazing) sheep and goats. This led to little soil cover resulting in land degradation in the form of erosion. The farmer paid for the establishment of the cactus-plantation. The cacti are spaced by 4 meters between plants and 3 meters between rows. This spacing is specific for fruit production, in case of fodder production a higher crop density is recommended. The cacti are planted on the contours in pits (40 centimetres depth and diameter) to ensure rain-water collection and efficient fertilizer application as the farm is situated on a 15% slope. The cacti reduce erosion as the roots hold the soil together. Field preparation for the establishment of the cactus field includes: (1) soil scrapping; (2) deep soil ploughing; (3) surface soil ploughing; and (4) pit digging. No fertilizer was applied in the establishment stage. Recurrent activities and costs are weeding, applying fertilizer and organic manure, maintaining the pits and harvesting. 200 kilograms per hectare of inorganic fertilizer (NPK) is applied between March and May. A total of 4 tons per hectare of organic manure is applied in September-November. These activities are non-mechanized, and therefore labour intensive.

The farm receives less than 200mm of annual rainfall and a public dam for irrigation is available. Therefore, the farmer invests in three water tanks to store water brought from the dam using his own truck, and in a drip irrigation system for high irrigation efficiency. The farm is irrigated by 360 cubic meter per month, divided in three events. The costs per cubic meter is 0.95 Jordanian Dinar (JOD) (including transportation costs). Before the realization of the drip irrigation system, the cacti were watered by hand (19991-2015). During the initial three years, cacti produce no fruits making the short-term return on investment rather negative. Currently, the cactus-plantation produces 32.5 ton/ha, equivalent to 65 kg /plant. The average net income per hectare varies between 1650 JOD to 2750 JOD. This makes the farmer relatively medium- wealthy with respect to the area. Most costs are induced by labour as the farmer uses manual weeding, harvesting and fertilizer application.

Even though the cultivation of cacti for its fruits on marginal lands has many benefits like the reduction in erosion, stable production, high output/input efficiency and good prices. There are some weaknesses, for example the relative young market of cactus products in Jordan compared to Tunisia. The Tunisian market for cactus products has a longer history, a high demand for other cactus-products like oil and juice and a better infrastructure (e.g. processing units) exist. These create more consistent prices for farmers, so less price drops during harvesting periods. Another weak point is the fact that cacti are cultivated in mono-culture. This significantly increases the risk of new pests and potential damage of the cultivated crop.

To conclude, this documentation shows that even though the selected farm does not represent an ideal site for cactus pear cultivation, the implementation of cacti is socio-economically and environmentally appropriate to cultivate dry marginal lands as cacti uses water and nutrients highly efficient while reducing land degradation. Therefore, the out-scaling of cacti is very valuable and a practical option to fight land degradation and enhance smallholder’s income.

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:

2014

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• during experiments/ research
• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact
• create beneficial social impact

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

No

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• Yes (Please fill out the questions below with regard to the land use before implementation of the Technology)

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

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

• Agro-pastoralism (incl. integrated crop-livestock)

3.4 Water supply

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

• full irrigation

Comments:

360m^3 of water applied through drip irrigation. The annual precipitation is less than 200mm

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

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

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

other/ national currency (specify):

JOD

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

0.71

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Soil scrapping	Prior to planting
2.	Deep soil ploughing	Prior to planting
3.	Surface soil ploughing	Prior to planting
4.	Pit digging	Prior to planting
5.	Planting cacti	Last third of the dry season (August - October)
6.	Establishment of drip irrigation	If feasible (This case 2015)

Comments:

Drip irrigation can be establishment when feasible (e.g. funds available). It would greatly enhance cactus-production but cacti can survive and produce without it.

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	Pit Digging & Planting	Person Hour	47.0	100.0	4700.0	100.0
Labour						100.0
Labour						100.0
Equipment	Soil Scrapping (Jackhammer)	Machine-Hour	35.0	200.0	7000.0	100.0
Equipment	Deep Soil Ploughing (Tractor)	Machine-Hour	9.0	250.0	2250.0	100.0
Equipment	Surface Soil Ploughing	Machine-Hour	9.0	250.0	2250.0	100.0
Plant material	Cactus Pads	Pad	5000.0	0.1	500.0	100.0
Construction material	Drip Irrigation (including labour for installation: 14 person days)	Whole System	1.0	13700.0	13700.0	100.0
Construction material	Water Tanks (including labour for construction: 10 person days)	Tank	3.0	500.0	1500.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					31900.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					44929.58

Comments:

The cacti are planted in pits. The digging of pits and planting of the cactus pads into the pits is done simultaneously, hence this is grouped in terms of labour. For soil preparation (scrapping and ploughing), the costs of labour are included in the machine costs as this was a hired service. The installation of the irrigation system and the construction of the tanks was each offered as a package and hence include the costs of labour.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	NPK Fertilizer (1x)	March - May
2.	NPK Fertilizer (1x)	September - November
3.	NPK Fertilizer (1x)	December - February
4.	Organic Manure Application	September - November
5.	Manual Weeding (2x)	March - May
6.	Maintenance of planting pits	April
7.	Harvesting	August - September

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	NPK Fertilizer Application	Person-Day	9.0	20.0	180.0	100.0
Labour	Organic Manure Application	Person-Day	7.0	20.0	140.0	100.0
Labour	Total Weeding	Person-Day	200.0	15.0	3000.0	100.0
Labour	Harvesting / Fruit Grabbing	Person-Day	280.0	20.0	5600.0	100.0
Equipment	Irrigation Management	Person Hour	252.0			100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	NPK Fertilizer	Ton	2.0	1000.0	2000.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Organic Manure	Ton	40.0	30.0	1200.0	100.0
Other	Pit Maintenance	Per Pit	4550.0	0.25	1137.5	100.0
Other	Water for Irrigation (360m3 per month)	Kubic Metre	4320.0	0.95	4104.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					17361.5
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					24452.82

Comments:

Irrigation Management consists of filling the tanks and using the drip irrigation.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

On the farm most work (e.g. weeding) is done manually. Therefore, the cost of labour contributes significantly to the total cost.

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?

Yes

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

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:

• group

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

Specify:

Most government land is open access.

Comments:

The water comes from a public dam.

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

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	very well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local hailstorm	not well
local snowstorm	not well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
heatwave	very well
cold wave	not well
extreme winter conditions	not well
drought	very well

Biological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
epidemic diseases	not well

Comments:

Hail storms and snow storms may occur, but very rarely. An example of an epidemic disease is black spot or rots.

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:

The Net Income per hectare varies between 1650 and 2750 JOD.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 1-10%

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

200 ha

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

• 91-100%

Comments:

All farmers who planted cactus started after requiring knowledge about the good prices for cactus fruits and the natural advantages of the cacti. So, this specific technology (Irrigated Cactus plantation) is not necessarily adopted by many farmers. But the use of cacti as a resilient, efficient and profitable crops is however adopted among many other farmers.

6.6 Adaptation

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

Yes

If yes, indicate to which changing conditions it was adapted:

• changing markets

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

The market demands increase for cactus pears. This results in different crop-spacing because cactus for pear production requires wider spacing, while cactus for fodder production can be planted more dense. Hence, changing market demands for the different products of cactus require different agronomic practices.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The cacti are highly productive with minimum inputs.
It does not require much water, which is important as irrigation water availability is a bottleneck for the farmer as well as for most areas in Jordan.
The cacti are even productive in poor soil and by growing cacti on these soils, it also reduces erosion.
The reduced risk of drought deteriorated yields is important as climate change leads to more extreme weather event, such as droughts. This will only increase in the future. Therefore the cactus's ability to cope with climate change (resilience to climate fluctuations) is a great advantage and increasingly important.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Due to the suitability of cacti to be cultivated in marginal lands, the soil is partly covered permanently by vegetation in these areas which protects these degraded lands. Therefore, cacti cultivation could offer incentive to prevent land degradation.
The technology offers increased resilience of the environment and its involved livelihoods. This is because cacti are more resilient to climate change induced effects such as increased droughts and increasing (summer) temperatures, as result of their high-water content and efficiency. Therefore, this technology is better suited for the future.

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?
The significant cost related to labour.	According to the farmer there were no alternatives.
Marketing can be considered a weakness as during harvest, the supply of cactus fruits was high and thus the selling-prices were low.	By investing in manufacturing/ processing the cacti and stably provide the market with other cactus-products, such as the Tunisian market.
The increased risk of new pests.	More awareness is required so the new pests can be identified, allowing proper and timely action.
The absence of agro-industrial processing units. Currently, the market demand is mostly related to the cactus fruits. However, cacti offer more such as seeds for oil extraction (such as the Tunisian cactus value chain) .	Investments to enhance cactus-value chain as is done in Tunisia.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
The possible knowledge gap for farmers to switch from their conventional/traditional agricultural practices to a more innovative one could be a bottleneck for out-scaling the technology.	This bottleneck can be overcome, by developing social capital such as (e.g.) institutions or farmers networks to disseminate knowledge. A good example is the field days for farmers organized by NARC and ICARDA.
The risks of pests and diseases is a weakness of the cacti as these plants are vulnerable to this. Also, due to the density and mono-cropping of the cacti, the pest/ disease may spread easily and rapidly over the field. Eventually, risking the production of the cacti, thus possibly reducing the income of local farmers.	A solution may be found in changing the agricultural activities. An example of such a possible solution is the introduction of intercropping, this could increase bio-diversity and reduce the potential loss of income in case of a pest-outbreak.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Fethi Ghouhis, Mounir Louhaichi, Ali Nefzaoui. (12/8/2019). Cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica) utilization for rehabilitating rangelands in arid regions of Tunisia. Acta Horticulturae, 1247, pp. 95-102.

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/10394

Title/ description:

Mounir Louhaichi, Sawsan Hassan, Giorgia Liguori. (30/12/2019). Manual: Cactus Pear Agronomic Practices.

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/10558

Title/ description:

HO de Waal, Mounir Louhaichi, Makiko Taguchi, Herman Fouché, Maryna de Wit. (25/1/2015). Development of a cactus pear agro-industry for the sub-Sahara Africa Region. Bloemfontein, South Africa: HO de Waal (Curator).

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/7109

Title/ description:

Mounir Louhaichi, Sawsan Hassan. (7/10/2018). Managing rangelands: promoting sustainable shrub species: Opuntia ficus-indica (L. ) Mill: a sustainable fodder plant for the dry areas. Beirut, Lebanon: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/9048

Title/ description:

Mourad Rekik, Mounir Louhaichi. (9/3/2014). Cactusnet: Promoting the social and ecological benefits of cactus production: Enhancing sheep reproduction through cactus-based feed diets. Beirut, Lebanon: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/8523

Title/ description:

Hichem Ben Salem, Mounir Louhaichi. (30/11/2014). Cactusnet: Promoting the social and ecological benefits of cactus production: Promoting Cactus as an alternative and sustainable livestock feed. Beiurt, Lebanon: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/5454

Title/ description:

Ali Nefzaoui, Mounir Louhaichi, Hichem Ben Salem. (30/1/2014). Cactus as a Tool to Mitigate Drought and to Combat Desertification. Journal of Arid Land Studies, 24(1), pp. 121-124.

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/7319

Title/ description:

Mounir Louhaichi (Producer), Sawsan Hassan (Director). (17/1/2021). Best Agronomic Practices for establishing cactus Orchard. Jordan: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) (Executive Producer).

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/12374