Technologies

Employing Fascines (Vegetative Check Dams) in Land Management [Madagascar]

Hesika

technologies_6478 - Madagascar

View sections

Expand all Collapse all
Completeness: 90%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

land user:

RAFARAMALALA Denise Germaine

Madagascar

land user:

RALAIMIDONA Jocelyn Jean Chrystophe

Madagascar

land user:

RAKOTOARIVELO Heriniaina Joseph

Madagascar

land user:

FIADANA

Madagascar

land user:

RAMANATSALAMA Aurélien

Madagascar

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. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Fascines are check dams made of vegetative material installed in gullies to reduce erosion.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Fascines are check dams made of vegetative material used on sloping terrain (tanety) - often within cultivated fields - to control gully erosion. This technique is applicable in various types of farms.
Constructing fascines involves creating a row of wooden stakes, with 2/3 of their length buried in the ground and 1/3 above the surface. These stakes are placed side by side at a distance of 50 cm to 1 m. The stakes support interwoven branches, and plant debris (paipaika) is added to complete the structure, effectively blocking sediment carried by the runoff water.
To enhance stability and reduce maintenance, a row of Vetiver grass is planted downstream of the fascine, and stakes that can grow from cuttings (e.g., false Kapok, Jatropha) are utilized.
Fascines minimize soil loss and reduce deposits downstream plots. Their effectiveness can be assessed by observing the difference in the level behind and below the structures: a difference of half a metre or more indicates that the structure is effective.
The construction of fascines not only prevents further erosion and soil loss but also creates new cultivation areas upstream of the structures. Regular inspection and repairs are necessary after heavy rainfall.
The installation of fascines makes it possible to:

- control gullies;
- limit surface runoff and reduce erosion caused by runoff;
- improve water infiltration;
- protect downstream areas from silting.

Fascines can be used to help where contour grass strips have been damaged by rills and gullies. Farmers with erodible soils on slopes consider the installation of fascines essential to preserve the integrity of their plots. They have various ideas for improving them, for example by planting Vetiver grass, Brachiaria grass or sisal, or by using stakes which take root and grow.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

Media Gallery

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

Madagascar

Region/ State/ Province:

Boeny

Further specification of location:

Ambalakida, Marovoay Banlieue, Tsaramandroso, Manerinerina

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area
Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

No

Map preview

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2021

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • through projects/ external interventions
Comments (type of project, etc.):

GIZ ProSoil Madagascar

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • reduce risk of disasters

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

No


Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
  • Perennial (non-woody) cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - maize
  • legumes and pulses - beans
  • legumes and pulses - peas
  • oilseed crops - groundnuts
  • root/tuber crops - cassava
  • Cowpea, Mucuna
Perennial (non-woody) cropping - Specify crops:
  • fodder crops - grasses
  • Brachiaria, Vetiver
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Is intercropping practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify which crops are intercropped:

Maize and peanuts
Maize and cowpeas

Is crop rotation practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

For Year N: combination of cereals and legumes or oilseeds. For Year N+1: maize. Year n+2: mucuna, and so on.

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)

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
  • cross-slope measure

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

vegetative measures

vegetative measures

  • V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants
structural measures

structural measures

  • S2: Bunds, banks
  • S11: Others

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
  • Wg: gully erosion/ gullying

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. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Stakes should be driven 2/3 of the way into the ground and 1/3 above the surface. They are spaced 50 cm apart and intertwined with branches and plant debris. The height of the fascine should not exceed the depth of the gully.

Author:

GIZ ProSoil Madagascar, GSDM

Date:

05/19/2022

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Where two fascines are installed in succession, the vertical interval between them should be 50 to 70 cm, depending on the inclination of the slope, and they should be installed from upstream to downstream.

Author:

GIZ ProSoil Madagascar, GSDM

Date:

05/19/2022

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:
  • per Technology unit
Specify unit:

Fascine line

Specify dimensions of unit (if relevant):

3 to 4 m

other/ national currency (specify):

ariary

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

4300.0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

5000

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Collection of materials and construction November-December
2. Planting of vetiver, brachiaria or sisal on fascines December-January

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 Collection of materials and construction man-days 1.0 5000.0 5000.0 100.0
Labour Planting of vetiver, brachiaria or sisal on fascines man-days 1.0 5000.0 5000.0 100.0
Plant material Vetiver/brachiaria/sisal plants Number 10.0 100.0 1000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 11000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 2.56
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

man-days

Comments:

The costs mentioned are related to the installation of a fascine 5 m long and 25 cm high.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Surveillance, repair or extension Every week for 3 months and every major rainstorm (January to March)

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 Surveillance and repair man-days 1.0 5000.0 5000.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 5000.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 1.16
Comments:

Surveillance and maintenance are performed entirely by the farmers.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labor for installation and maintenance

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

1400.00

Agro-climatic zone
  • sub-humid

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:
  • concave situations

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • low (<1%)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

medium

Water quality (untreated):

poor drinking water (treatment required)

Water quality refers to:

ground water

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • high
Habitat diversity:
  • low
Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

The region boasts a wide array of plant and animal species, some of which are native to the region. Using fascines fosters the development of pedofauna, due to the accumulation of plant debris, which provides a food source for this fauna. In terms of habitats, approximately 20% of the region comprises suitable environments for supporting this biodiversity, including forests, water bodies, mangroves, and more, although this percentage remains relatively low.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Sedentary or nomadic:
  • Sedentary
Market orientation of production system:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
  • animal traction
Gender:
  • women
  • men
Age of land users:
  • youth
  • middle-aged

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • medium-scale

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • individual
Water use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)
Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

Specify:

The lands are owned by those taking care of them.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
financial services:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

crop production

decreased
increased
Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased
decreased

farm income

decreased
increased

workload

increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency

reduced
improved

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased

soil cover

reduced
improved

soil loss

increased
decreased

soil accumulation

decreased
increased
Climate and disaster risk reduction

landslides/ debris flows

increased
decreased
Specify assessment of on-site impacts (measurements):

These are estimates provided by the users interviewed.

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

downstream siltation

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Siltation of downstream rice fields is reduced, which means the technology is advantageous.

damage on neighbours' fields

increased
reduced
Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

These are estimates by the farmers.

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
tropical storm not well
local rainstorm well
local thunderstorm well
local hailstorm moderately

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • single cases/ experimental

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
Surface water erosion is halted and water-borne sediment accumulates behind the fascines.
The silting or sanding of downstream rice fields is reduced, thus increasing production in these fields.
The soil accumulated behind the fascines can be cultivated, increasing agricultural production.

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?
Cyclones cause too much rain and water erosion, which means that installations are sometimes washed away. Rebuild the fascines.
The system is fairly costly and labor-intensive to set up. Hire labor for the work, but prioritize activities based on available resources.
Fascines do not totally stop water erosion, since water always finds another way through. Extend the area covered by fascines and build new ones depending on erosion.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Facines are rehabilitation techniques that must be systematically coupled with other preventive protective measures. Use of standard or enriched grass strips.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys

Five (5) fields visited

  • interviews with land users

Five (5) farmers interviewed

  • compilation from reports and other existing documentation

GIZ ProSoil Madagascar technical sheet

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

01/31/2023

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Région Boeny, 2016, "Schéma Régional d’Aménagement du Territoire de la Région Boeny"

Available from where? Costs?

Boeny Region Hotel

Title, author, year, ISBN:

GIZ ProSol Madagascar, 2022, "Livret des Paysans Relais"

Available from where? Costs?

GIZ ProSol Madagascar

Title, author, year, ISBN:

GIZ ProSol Madagascar, 2022, Poster "Fascines et cordon de paille"

Available from where? Costs?

GIZ ProSol Madagascar

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Raharinaivo S., 2008, "Les techniques de correction des ravines et de stabilisations des Lavaka" tirés des acquis du PLAE Marovoay

Available from where? Costs?

https://wocatpedia.net/images/d/d9/Solofo_Raharinaivo_%282008%29_-_Les_techniques_de_Correction_des_ravines_et_de_Stabilisation_des_Lavaka_.pdf

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Les Fascines (Fiche technique, Hydraulique douce)

URL:

https://marne.chambre-agriculture.fr/fileadmin/user_upload/National/FAL_commun/publications/Grand-Est/51-Fiche-hydraulique-douce-fascine.pdf

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules