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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1089, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Strengthening national-level institutional and professional capacities of country Parties towards enhanced UNCCD monitoring and reporting – GEF 7 EA Umbrella II (GEF 7 UNCCD Enabling Activities_Umbrella II)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 6392, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'National Soil Services Centre, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture & Livestock (NSSC) - Bhutan', '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

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

Comments:

Based on the responses provided by the interviewee (Group Chairman), it appears that electric fences may not directly contribute to mitigating land degradation. However, they can be considered as part of a technological approach, particularly in terms of adaptation, given their effectiveness in land restoration, fallow land reversion, ensuring food security, and ultimately enhancing livelihoods.

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The Electric Fencing System in Bhutan serves as a non-lethal approach to safeguarding crops from wild animals, aligning with the principles of Gross National Happiness (GNH). GNH emphasizes values such as compassion, non-killing, and harmonious coexistence with nature and its elements.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The Electric Fencing System in Bhutan serves as a non-lethal approach to safeguarding crops from wild animals, aligning with the principles of Gross National Happiness (GNH). GNH emphasizes values such as compassion, non-killing, and harmonious coexistence with nature.
The National Plant Protection Centre (NPPC), Department of Agriculture (DoA), Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MoAL) has been facilitating the application and installation of electric fence systems nationwide. This is achieved through the provision of comprehensive guidelines to help the public comprehend the fundamental components and installation procedures.
In essence, the electric fence system consists of three major parts: Energizers, Insulators, and Earth return. The energizer is responsible for generating high-voltage pulse electricity (ranging from 9-12 KV), which is then delivered along the fence wires. The majority of energizers are directly connected to the electricity line, while in some isolated cases, solar panels and batteries are used as alternative power sources. Insulators are typically crafted from a non-conductive material and serve as a barrier between the electrified wire and the wooden post. In the Bhutanese market, these insulators are not readily available, thus as an alternative, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe has been found to be effective and cheap. The electric fence earth return serves as an essential pathway in the electric circuit, collecting high voltage and current from the earth and returning it to the energizer.
The loss of crops to wild animals leads to increased production costs in Bhutan (time spent in crop guarding) and the expansion of fallow lands. Farmers often resort to illegal and fatal methods of electric fencing, tapping electricity directly from the main line. To address these issues, the implementation of electric fencing, utilizing imported IEC-certified energizers and locally fabricated fencing materials, has proven to be successful. This electric fencing system, introduced after five years of pre-testing across the country, covers various locations targeting different problem species of animals. Not only is this technology effective in controlling wild pests, but it also enjoys high social acceptance among Bhutanese farmers due to its cost-effectiveness and being non-lethal to wild pests.
A recent study on the impact of electric fencing on food security focused on the Laptsakha community in Senggye Gewog, Sarpang Dzongkhag. They faced threats to food security from elephants, boar and stray cattle from neighboring communities in India. Crop production in Laptsakha was negligible before the introduction of electric fencing: resettled households contemplated returning, fertile lands were left fallow, and incomes shrank. The turning point came in 2013 with the introduction of electric fencing. This intervention successfully mitigated wildlife attacks on crops, ensuring food security and contributing to a harmonious ecosystem and improved livelihoods for the people of Laptsakha.
The electric fence, covering a distance of 7 km, protects a total of 60 households in all, safeguarding about 60 (24 ha) acres of vulnerable lands. Electric fences have various benefits including:
•Harmonious Approach: they do not cause harm to animals beyond a repellent shock.
•Economical and Easy to Build: they are cost-effective and relatively easy to construct.
•Learning and Deterrence: animals quickly learn to respect electric fences.
•Durability: they have an extended service life.
•Versatility: they offer a variety of designs and can control a wide range of wild animals.

The installation of an electric fence involves a participatory approach and several key steps:
•Location and Length: determine the location and approximate length of the electric fence either by manual measurement, or remote technologies for larger expanses.
•Material Estimation: estimate the required materials per kilometre based on the identified area, including wooden poles, HDPE pipe, and GI wire.
•Additional Materials: Consider other essential materials like energizers, solar panels, charge controllers, and batteries, depending on the specific requirements.
•Cost Estimation: Calculate the cost of installation, which varies regionally. For example, to instal one kilometre of an electric fence is estimated at about Nu. 7,450 (USD 95) excluding labour costs and cost of wooden poles which is sourced locally.

The implementation of electric fencing in the community has brought significant advantages, particularly in securing food. Prior to this intervention, the community faced severe challenges in harvesting crops, with approximately 70% of fertile lands being left fallow due to constant human-wildlife conflicts. Crop guarding became routine & risky.
With the introduction of electric fences, the community's agricultural landscape has undergone a positive transformation. Crop diversification has been enhanced, encompassing maize, ginger, paddy, mandarin fruit trees and areca nut. The frequency of wild elephant attacks has significantly decreased, leading to a notable increase in crop production. This has resulted in secured food sources and improved livelihoods. Additionally, the community has successfully revived previously fallow lands.
While the electric fencing has proven effective, there are challenges faced by the land users, notably the frequent damage to energizers, primarily attributed to thunderstorms. This has resulted in higher maintenance costs. In one specific instance, the community had to mobilize approximately Nu. 145,000 (USD 1800) independently to replace damaged energizers and other materials, supplementing the continued support from the government.

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:

2013

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The electric fencing program in the community was facilitated by the former Renewable Natural Resources and Development Centre (RNR-DC) - Yusipang, now known as the National Center for Organic Agriculture- Yusipang. Additionally, the expertise of the electric fence specialist from ARDC - Wengkhar, Mongar (Eastern Bhutan) was involved in the implementation of the program.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

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

Yes

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

• Agroforestry

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

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

• No (Continue with question 3.4)

Comments:

The introduction of electric fencing in the community has not led to a change in land use patterns. However, there has been a notable transformation in land cover over the years. Prior to the implementation of electric fencing, approximately 70% of the currently cultivated lands (comprising 325 acres, including 168 acres of dry land and 157 acres of wetland) were left fallow due to the threat of wildlife (human-wildlife conflict). The introduction of electric fencing has played a crucial role in revitalizing these fertile fallow lands, bringing them back into cultivation.

3.4 Water supply

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

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

Comments:

The community is well-equipped with two full-time irrigation sources: Mahajan Irrigation and Ghantay Irrigation canals. However, the reliance on irrigation is reduced when there is sufficient rainfall. Therefore, they describe the irrigation system as a mixed approach, combining both irrigation sources and rainwater.

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• natural and semi-natural forest management
• integrated pest and disease management (incl. organic agriculture)
• wetland protection/ management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

The electric fence can be a structural measure that ensures energy savings due to its versatility (solar and electric-power options). It can be also considered as one of the structural measures ensuring a harmonious environment.

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

The electric fencing ensures harmonious environment for wild life. Their lives are prevented from fatal threats being attempted by farmers in controlling wild pests. Hence, they are dedicated with the safe habitats, which ultimately results in enhanced bio-diversity.

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:

The electric fence plays an important role in preventing and reducing land degradation. The lands encompassed within the electric fence are well managed and put to good use (higher ground coverage with year-round cultivation, proper nutrient management, and others). Caring for these productive lands encircled by electric fencing thereby either prevents or reduces land degradation ultimately.

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 unit

other/ national currency (specify):

Ngultrum (Nu.)

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

80.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Area identification through Google Map by ARDC-Yusipang	2013, Winter
2.	Cleaning of vegetation along the identified fence line (10 m width)	2013, Winter (after crop harvest)
3.	Ground clearing and levelling (2 m width)	2013, Winter (after crop harvest)
4.	Gathering of fencing poles	2013, Winter (after crop harvest)
5.	Procurement and facilitation of materials (energizers, solar panels, nails, GI wire, insulation pipes)	2013, Winter (after crop harvest)
6.	Execution of fencing activities	2013, Winter (after crop harvest)

Comments:

The actual electric fencing works in Laptsakha, measuring a distance of seven kilometres was completed in less than a month. Better community cooperation was a major reason behind this success, as per the Group's chairman.

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	Man	Person-days	1600.0	250.0	400000.0	100.0
Equipment	Energizer	No.	6.0	9500.0	57000.0
Equipment	GI wire (SWG 16)	Kg	356.0	95.0	33820.0
Equipment	Nail (3 inch)	Kg	106.0	82.0	8692.0
Equipment	Solar Panel (20 watts)	No.	6.0	7000.0	42000.0
Equipment	Charge controller	No.	6.0	1800.0	10800.0
Equipment	Acidic Battery	No.	6.0	2800.0	16800.0
Equipment	Lubricants (Gear oil)	Litre	6.0	254.0	1524.0
Equipment	Insulators (HDPE pipe [32 mm])	Metre	781.0	48.0	37488.0
Construction material	Wooden poles	No.	1400.0			100.0
Other	Other accessories	NA	1.0	1000.0	1000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					609124.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					7614.05

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

National Centre for Organic Agriculture, Yusipang

Comments:

The labour contribution was from Laptsakha and Nichula villages as the electric fencing benefitted both villages. Therefore, a higher number of land users are involved in the construction of the technology.
The total cost for the establishment of the technology is USD 7614.05 for 7 km (USD 1087.7 for 1 km). This includes labour cost which is borne by the land users.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Replacement of energizers during breakdowns	As and when breakdown occurs
2.	Fence line clearing	Monthly

Comments:

Between 2013 and 2019, approximately 20 energizer sets had to be replaced due to thunderstorm damage. To address this issue, the community transitioned to using solar-powered energizers instead of electricity, proving to be a more effective solution. Double batteries were employed to ensure consistent current flow during cloudy days. As part of the routine maintenance, the clearing of the fence line became a monthly task, with each household assigned an area of approximately 116 meters to manage.

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	Labor	Person-days	59.0	700.0	41300.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					41300.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					516.25

If you are unable to break down the costs in the table above, give an estimation of the total costs of maintaining the Technology:

145000.0

Comments:

The beneficiaries covered the cost of acquiring the damaged energizers through monthly contributions of Nu. 200 per household and other penalty revenues. The total costs for maintenance of the technology is USD 516.25 for 7 km ( USD 73.75 for 1 km).

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The primary factor incurring the cost, according to the beneficiaries, was the energizer set, which necessitates frequent replacement.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

Comments and further specifications on topography:

The gentle plain dominates the area with a slope ranging from 2 to 5 per cent.

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.

Moisture content 3.31%, organic matter 7.16%, Organic carbon 4.16%, pH 6.81, electrical conductivity 261.97 µs/cm, nitrogen 0.21%, phosphorus 0.34 ppm, Potassium 201.07 mg/100ml, texture sand clay loam.
The soil analysis was conducted at the Science Laboratory of College of Natural Resources, Royal University of Bhutan, Lobesa, Punakha.

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

The rich periphery environment, higher vegetation coverage, and evident agroforestry indicate high species and habitat diversity.

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

• Family land ownership

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

Specify:

The land use rights in Bhutan is traditional legal system guided by formal land act and land rules and regulations.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

Comments:

The community is striving for the upgradation of the present primary school to high school.

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

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

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	not known

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	very well
local thunderstorm	not well
local windstorm	very well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
flash flood	not well at all
landslide	not well at all

Comments:

As per the interviewee, the annual rainfall has remained constant over the past decade. However, there has been a noticeable shift in the rainfall pattern, characterized by erratic rainfall. In previous years, the rainfall followed a seasonal pattern, which is no longer consistent in recent times.

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):

The 7 km electric fencing program has benefitted 60 households.

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

• 0-10%

Comments:

The initial establishment was done through external support by covering the whole community catchment area. One-time maintenance involving the cost of Nu. 145,000/- was initiated by the community by mobilizing their fund.

6.6 Adaptation

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

Yes

other (specify):

Due to target animal species

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

The existing electric fence, operational up to now, underwent significant modifications, incorporating a chain-link fence valued at 1.10 million between February and May 2023. This alteration is intended to deter active wildlife pests, specifically monkeys and elephants.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Electric fencing aligns with the convictions of the land users, avoiding harm to wildlife as a means of protecting the land from wild animals.
Scaring wild animals with a mild electric shock, the technology deters them from approaching due to the fear of the electric shock from the fence.
Creating a favorable environment for agricultural activities, the technology encourages land users to participate in farming, resulting in increased production and household income.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Reduced risk of loss of life: Wild animals, particularly elephants, pose a threat to the lives of land users, with some reported fatalities. The technology can help mitigate or prevent such incidents.
The replication of this technology can eliminate fatal attempts made by land users in various parts of the country to control wild pests.

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?
Continuous break down of energizers has incurred high maintenance costs	Solar-powered fencing has been the best alternative as implemented by the community.
Clearing of the land under the fence is labourious and time consuming.	Timely monitoring of the clearing activity should be done.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
The GI wire experiences swift rusting.	Timely greasing and utilizing superior quality GI wire.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Technical Reference Manual for installation and maintenance of Electric Fence, National Plant Protection Centre (NPPC), n.d.

URL:

https://www.nppc.gov.bt/electric-fencing-manual/

Title/ description:

Implementation Guidelines for Electric Fencing System, National Plant Protection Centre (NPPC), 2015

URL:

https://www.nppc.gov.bt/electric-fencing-manual/

Title/ description:

EF accessories, National Plant Protection Centre (NPPC), 2015

URL:

https://www.nppc.gov.bt/ef-accessories/

7.4 General comments

The questionnaire is not easy to apply for such technology in terms of sections 2.5 and 4.2. Under section 2.5 “specify the spread of the technology” the options are not applicable for this technology implemented in 7 km length. Under section 4.2. it is difficult to specify units for the cost calculation. The cost for overall technology implementation can be added. However, the cost specified in km is not uniform. For example, the cost for 1 km could be USD 95 but for 2 km it will be less than USD 190 as there is no need for two energizers and other accessories.