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)

Soil protection and rehabilitation for food security (ProSo(i)l) {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 6110, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)', '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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Pigeon pea, a leguminous shrub, enhances the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil. Through symbiotic nitrogen fixation, it can fix approximately 70 kg of nitrogen per hectare per season. When intercropped with maize, pigeon pea has the potential to double both maize yields and pigeon pea grain production.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Pigeon pea, a leguminous shrub, is renowned for its capacity to enhance the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil. Through symbiotic nitrogen fixation, it can fix approximately 70 kg of nitrogen per hectare per season, extending until pod formation. When intercropped with maize, pigeon pea has the potential to double both maize yields and pigeon pea grain production, the latter being a valuable protein source. This technology boosts producers' income and contributes to food security. This combination utilized widely, excluding hydromorphic soils.
To implement this method, producers sow 20 kg/ha of maize seed and 20 kg/ha of pigeon pea, with 2 seeds per hole. Maize is sown using band sowing techniques, with a row spacing of 0.80 m and 1.60 m between plants at a depth of 3 to 5 cm. A row of maize is planted between two rows of pigeon peas, resulting in a density of 15,625 to 25,000 pigeon pea plants per hectare.
The combination of maize and pigeon pea is considered a climate change adaptation measure, as it allows for direct nitrogen input and helps improve soil productivity and fertility, thereby helping to guarantee food security and protect the soil in the long term.
Implementation and maintenance involve a succession of operations: soil preparation, seed purchase, ploughing, sowing of maize 2 to 4 weeks before pigeon pea sowing, followed by weed management as needed. Harvesting begins with maize, which matures earlier than pigeon peas. Threshing operations are then carried out. After the harvest, pigeon pea plants are pruned, and firewalls are installed to support the growth of new flowering stems.
Combining pigeon pea with maize also helps control maize pests, especially maize leaf pests. The foliage of pigeon pea provides ample biomass, which aids in soil fertilization, reduces soil evapotranspiration, and enhances microbial activity.
For producers, this technology is simple and easy to implement, often regarded as a valuable "treasure." There is a noticeable contrast for producers between fields where maize is combined with pigeon pea and those without. Control plots without pigeon pea typically yield 0.5 to 1 ton/ha of maize, while plots with pigeon pea have shown yields of up to 3 tons/ha of maize.

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:

2016

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

This technology was introduced by GIZ Benin's ProSOL project.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• create beneficial economic 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:

No

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• integrated soil fertility management

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:

• reduce land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

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):

CFA F

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

615.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Clearing	March-April
2.	Plowing	May to June
3.	Maize seeding	June to July
4.	Pigeon pea seeding	June to July
5.	Weeding	June to July
6.	Maize harvesting	December
7.	Pigeon pea harvesting	January to February

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	Clearing	ha	1.0	15000.0	15000.0	100.0
Labour	Ploughing	ha	1.0	30000.0	30000.0	100.0
Labour	Maize seeding	ha	1.0	10000.0	10000.0	100.0
Labour	Pigeon pea seeding	ha	1.0	10000.0	10000.0	100.0
Equipment	Weeding	ha	1.0	12000.0	12000.0	100.0
Equipment	Maize harvesting	ha	1.0	15000.0	15000.0	100.0
Equipment	Pigeon pea harvesting	ha	1.0	10000.0	10000.0	100.0
Plant material	Maize seeds	Kg	20.0	300.0	6000.0	100.0
Plant material	Pigeon pea seeds	kg	20.0	500.0	10000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					118000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					191.87

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Coppicing	January to February
2.	Firebreaking	November to December

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	Coppicing	ha	1.0	10000.0	10000.0	100.0
Labour	Firebreaking	ha	1.0	5000.0	5000.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					15000.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					24.39

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labour scarcity

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?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

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:

• communal/ village

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

Specify:

The patriarch of the clan divides the land among the children. Each child knows which area is dedicated to him or her.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Climate and disaster risk reduction

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	well
seasonal temperature	dry season	decrease	moderately
annual rainfall		decrease	moderately
seasonal rainfall	dry season	increase	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)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• > 50%

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

• 11-50%

6.6 Adaptation

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

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Increased crop yields
Regeneration of soil fertility
Edibility of the seeds

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Enhanced soil fertility
High nitrogen fixation capacity
Increased crop yields
Weed control capability

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?
Maintenance difficulties, sudden bursting of pods	Carry out maintenance when seedlings are not too developed; harvest as pods turn brown.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
The market for pigeon pea grain is virtually non-existent.	Create warehouses for the sale of pigeon pea seeds; display pigeon pea seeds at agricultural fairs to promote their environmental, health and food safety benefits.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, 2018, Compendium de fiches techniques du formateur

Title, author, year, ISBN:

INRAB, 2015, Fiche Technique pour l'association du maïs et du pois d'angole pour l'amélioration de la fertilité et de l'humidité du sol au Sud du Bénin

Available from where? Costs?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331862221_FICHE_TECHNIQUE_08

Title, author, year, ISBN:

AMADJI Firmin. 2004, Pour une amélioration durable de la fertilité du sol et des rendements au centre et au sud Bénin. Bulletin de la Recherche Agronomique du Bénin (BRAB), Annales des Sciences Agronomiques du Bénin. 2 (2): 123 -139

Title, author, year, ISBN:

BADOU A., AKONDE P. T., ADJANOHOUN A., ADJE I. T., AÏHOU K.et IGUE A. M. 2013, Effets de différents modes de gestion des résidus de soja sur le rendement du maïs dans les conditions agroécologiques du CentreBénin. Bulletin de la Recherche agronomique du Bénin (BRAB), Numéro spécial Fertilité du maïs – Janvier : 34-38. BRAB

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.slire.net