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)

DESIRE (EU-DES!RE)

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

University Ibn Tofail (University Ibn Tofail) - Morocco

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

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Crops rotation: cereals / fodder legumes (lupin), with a biennial crop rotation

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Farming is the main activity of the Sehoul population. In the past, it was based on subsistence cultivation and especially on extensive breeding outside the farm. The cultivation practice mostly applied was barley monoculture. Nowadays, crop rotation is more and more diversified (use of other cereal species and mainly legumes). Because of land degradation on forest pasture, farmers increasingly use their farm land for fodder or legume production such as oats and lupin. White lupins were introduced in the region during the colonial era (1912-1956), through individual initiatives with no external support. The advantages of lupin cultivation are its ability to grow on poor and stony soils and, like other leguminous crops, it does not need nitrogen fertilizers because of its ability to fix nitrogen from the air, which reduces the costs. Additionally, lupin does not require much water (a minimum of 350 mm per year is sufficient). Considering the importance of pastoral activity in the production system of the Sehoul district, this technology meets the expectations of the population as follows. Firstly, there is improvement of fodder production. Lupin is a leguminous crop which can be eaten by ruminants either as green fodder or as grain. Secondly, there is soil improvement through a better structure, an increased soil organic matter content and better nitrogen retention that can be used for the next cultivation. Thirdly, there is a better soil cover because lupin is an invasive plant with efficient roots for finding nutrients, which allows its cultivation on poor soils.
The lupin cultivation technique consists of the following: spreading the seed in October-November, and possibly until mid-December. Early sowing shows good yields, because cold temperatures cause early blossoming. For white lupin, sowing density is about 100 kg/ha. Ploughing (20-25 cm deep ploughing is sufficient) to bury the seed is performed with a swing plough and two mules on slopes, and with a metallic plough or a tractor on plains. No weeding or fertilization activities are required because of the lupin's good nitrogen fixation capacity. However, an additional second or third ploughing can improve the harvest, but is often constrained by a lack of means. A first grazing is allowed in March but afterwards it is left so that it can recover again. Harvesting is done manually with sickles in August and residues are grazed again. Seed production is 8-10 quintals/ha, biomass is 3000 kg/ha.
This technology is applied on plateau margins with steep slopes, where traditional small-scale land use includes predominantly winter crop cultivations (wheat and barley) and secondary spring food cultivations (broad beans, chickpea, maize). On the plateau, bigger and better maintained farms perform irrigated cultivation with ground water. The cork oak forests are coveted as pasture land and firewood source and therefore they are regarded as important for their free natural fodder resources. Pasture land (except forests) covers a small area (12% of the Sehoul area) because of land appropriation and cultivation. Only the collective and the fallow lands are now used as pasture lands and generally show important and alarming degradation processes.

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:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

• introduced by colonists

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Lupin (like other fodder plants) was introduced by the French colonists (1912-1956) and the land users have continued to use it since, in rotation with other cultivations

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

Comments:

Main crops (cash and food crops): Blé tendre, légumineuses, fève, maïs, lupin Orge

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Decrease of productivity, continued exploitation on poor land leading to sealing and crusting, poor soils, cultivation with low ground cover, soil depletion, decrease of fertility and organic matter

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Decrease of productivity, sealing and crusting

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

Livestock is grazing on crop residues

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)

3.4 Water supply

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, mixed rainfed - irrigated

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Type of agronomic measures: better crop cover, legume inter-planting, rotations / fallows, contour tillage

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bq: quantity / biomass decline

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (Total clearing activities causes soil degradation problems), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (soil fragility because of the very thin topsoil surface layer and the low organic matter content), poverty / wealth

Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (Crop monoculture, which replaced the forest, cannot provide the necessary soil cover. The inadequate fertility management has also led to a decrease in the organic matter), overgrazing (After the reduction of pasture lands because of the cultivation area extension, the animal pressure has increased and pasture activities were reduced.), population pressure, education, access to knowledge and support services

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Dirham

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

8.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Purchase a swing plough
2.	Purchase a metallic plough
3.	Purchase mules
4.	Purchase a cart

Comments:

Life span of the swing plough: 10 years
Life span of the metallic plough, the mule and the cart: 30 years

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
Equipment	Reaping hook	piece	1.0	3.0	3.0	100.0
Equipment	Swing plough	piece	1.0	20.0	20.0	100.0
Equipment	Metallic plough	piece	1.0	42.0	42.0	100.0
Equipment	Mule	piece	2.0	2703.0	5406.0	100.0
Equipment	Cart	piece	1.0	203.0	203.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					5674.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					709.25

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Seeds	during the first rains in Autumn
2.	Ploughing	after seeding
3.	Harvest	end of June
4.	Gathering and canning	end of the harvest

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	Seeding	person days	1.0	5.0	5.0	100.0
Labour	Ploughing	person days	2.0	10.0	20.0	100.0
Labour	Harvest	person days	2.0	10.0	20.0	100.0
Labour	Gathering and canning	person days	1.0	5.0	5.0	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	kg	100.0	0.42	42.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					92.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					11.5

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: ploughing on slopes = wooden swing plough; ploughing in the plains = mettalig plough; important areas = tractor

Equipment and seed costs concern the hectare of cultivated land. The labour costs for a working day are 5 US$ per person.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

les équipements et les semences

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Cette tranche d’altitude coïncide avec le fond des vallées de l’oued Bouregreg et de l’oued Grou (10% de la superficie totale) . Cette tranche concerne le reste du plateau de Shoul. Cette tranche d’altitude coïncide avec le fond des vallées de l’oued Bouregreg et de l’oued Grou (10% de la superficie totale) . Cette tranche concerne le reste du plateau de Shoul. les versants bordiers de Bouregreg et du grou sont disséqués en pysage valloné . Sehoul présente aussi de larges fonds de vallées

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

la biodiversité a régréssé à cause du défrichment. à l'intérieur de la forêt le ciste est dominant.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Difference in the involvement of women and men: tradition make that women are responsible for the household and men for the works on the fields

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 0.5% - 1%

12% of the land users are very rich and own 1% of the land.
19% of the land users are rich and own 5% of the land.
25% of the land users are average wealthy and own 12% of the land.
24% of the land users are poor and own 22% of the land.
20% of the land users are poor and own 60% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: There is no major differences

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:

• individual, titled

• in associations

Land use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

Comments:

Mainly melk (private property, 52%) and associations (13%)

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

Soil

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	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 known

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:

Rotation benefits can only appear in the long-term, after the amortization of implementation expenses.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

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

• 91-100%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

40 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: This technology is in decline because of the use of fertilizers which allow a crop/crop rotation and because of the increased seeds prices. As for food leguminous plants, this cultivation requires the mobilization of the family labour, nowadays not available taking into account the factor of emigration.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Better soil fertility management How can they be sustained / enhanced? Make demonstrations for the benefit of the population

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Maintenance of the soil fertility How can they be sustained / enhanced? Encourage the crop rotation by subsidy of the administration
Low-cost technology How can they be sustained / enhanced? Make demonstrations for the benefit of the population
Technology not very demanding in SWC knowledge How can they be sustained / enhanced? Technical support to use the technology better

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?
Reduce the use of crop rotation and move the animals away from the exploited land occupied by cultivations throughout the year.	Replace legumes by fodder crop on the open-field

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Erosion risks for the spring cultivations (maize), because the soil is bare during a high rainfall period.	Introduce a catch crop cultivation before the legumes or maize cultivation in order to cover the soil during the heavy rains. Mulching can also be done.
Very demanding in family and animals workforce	Mechanization

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Antari M. (2007) : Mesure de l’érosion et du ruissemellent dans le micro-bassin versant Matlaq et essai de modélisation (Région de Rabat, Maroc). Thèse de Doctorat, Université Mohammed V-Agdal, Faculté des Lettres et Science Humaines, Rabat. 218p.

Available from where? Costs?

Bibliothèque de la Faculté des Lettres et Science Humaines, Rabat, Maroc

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Nafaa R. (1997) : Dynamique du milieu naturel de la Mamora : paléoenvironnements et évolution actuelle de la surface. Thèse d’Etat en géographie physique, FLSH Rabat, 275p

Available from where? Costs?

Bibliothèque de la Faculté des Lettres et Science Humaines, Rabat, Maroc

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Ghanem H. (1981) : Contribution à la connaissance des sols du Maroc. Genèse et répartition des sols des régions des Zaers, de la basse Chaouia et des Shouls (Méséta marocaine). Cahiers de la Recherche Agronomique n°37&38, INRA, Rabat.

Available from where? Costs?

Bibliothèque de la Faculté des Lettres et Science Humaines, Rabat, Maroc

Title, author, year, ISBN:

DPA (2001) : Projet de mise en valeur bour des Shouls. Direction Provinciale de l’Agriculture, Rabat.

Available from where? Costs?

Direction Provinciale de l’Agriculture, Rabat.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

DPA (2002): Étude de l’analyse des sols dans le périmètre de mise en valeur en bour des Shouls. Evaluation de la fertilité des sols et fertilisation des cultures. Marché négocié 01-2002-DPA-36.

Available from where? Costs?

Direction Provinciale de l’Agriculture, Rabat.