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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 15, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Pilot Program for Climate Resilience, Tajikistan (WB / PPCR)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 507, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e. V. (Welthungerhilfe) - Tajikistan', '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

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Use of the SLM technology facilitates the development of bench terraces from contour channels by gradually removing soil material up the slope for an estimated 5 years until the terraces on the slope reach a desired width of 1.2 m.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The SLM technology is thought to stop water run-off resulting in the prevention of damage to the top soil on steep slopes. This enables better distribution and infiltration of water into the soil. A complementing live fence, along with a metal net along the perimeter aim to stop livestock grazing. Contour ditches are planted in intervals with fruit trees, and the live fence is made of a combination of fire wood, trees and bushes. This combination makes possible the establishment of an agro forestry system on a slope in an area with limited irrigation using making use of the natural rainfall.
Details: 1. Ditches are dug out along the contour lines drawn by an "A" frame on the slope. 2. Seedlings are planted in 5 metre intervals, positioned right in the middle of the ditch. 3. The back wall behind each tree (upslope) has a half moon cutting to enable an even water/moisture supply. 4. The ditches are barriered with "septas" between two trees to trap water in the individual sections. 5. Horizontally across the ditches, the tree species vary, but vertically are homogeneous. 6. The strips between ditches are left free to enable natural grass to grow. 7. The residual soil material is mounted in front of the ditches in piles the width of a shovel. 8. The complementing perimeter live fence and metal net (1.5m height) is supported by wooden poles made of Acacia trees. (Assumed life span of poles is 25 years). 9. Improvised drip irrigation with 5 litre plastic bottles is used together with mulch coverage beneath the trees. 10. Species composition: apple, cherry, apricot, grape, walnut, pomegranate. In the garden; species of Acacia, Ailantus, dogroses and willow act as a live fence.

Purpose of the Technology: The aim of this system is to significantly reduce the water run-off that removes the top soil, and to subsequently prevent water erosion, and the formation/development of gullies. This can be achieved through the following methods; conserving the available resources and using them more efficiently, prevention overgrazing and improving the natural soil cover, as well as changing the type of land management towards a more sustainable and profitable one.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The plot was established on one side of a micro watershed. In mid February the contour lines were identified using an “A” frame. Digging of contour ditches then took until late February. The material was accumulated down the slope in deposits the width of a shovel to build a riser. At the beginning of March all the fruit tree seedlings were planted in the middle of the ditches. Perimeter fencing was constructed and live fence plants were planted up until late March. In May, the grass around the trees was cut and used for mulching beneath the trees. During June and July in the first year the plants needed watering 3 times a week which was done using a drip irrigation system with 5 litre plastic bottles. To help prevent the water heating and evaporating, the bottles were left under the mulch cover. Mulching and irrigation are repeated every dry and hot season. Every spring, the soil material is removed alongside the inner wall of the ditch just taking an amount that equals the width of a shovel, and accumulated down the slope to extend the riser. Materials required include: (1) Ditches: hand tools, stakes, rope, “A” frame, (2) Live fence: seedlings of Acacia, Ailantus, willow and dog rose, (3) Fencing: metal net, wooden poles, metal wire, (4) Cow dung, lime suspension, straw, mulch, plastic bottles.

Natural / human environment: The watershed can be characterised as follows: Hydrology - surface water is available only at times of rain and snow melt, this can be used for irrigation only. No sources of potable water exist. Soils are of loess type, as generally characteristic to the whole area. Flora - natural grasses prevail in the micro watershed, 9 species could be identified. Natural bushes and trees were completely removed due to high demand for fuelwood. Cultivation of rare tree varieties and household gardening was practiced in advance of the project. Fauna - Wild animals are often still seen such as turtles, lizards and snakes. Farm animals - mixed breeds of cattle, sheep and goats are very important. The households in this micro watershed area own almost 350 animals. The majority of these are kept for the summer season in adjacent pastures. The micro watershed was first inhabited in early 2000. Five households were established with a total of around 40 inhabitants. Family heads tend to be in their early 40s. Families have 7 to 9 members, including 5 to 7 children. All are of Tajik ethnicity, and Muslim, open to secular values. Of these 5 households, only 4 households have adopted the SLM technology. The fifth household only decided to join the project after witnessing their neighbour’s positive experiences. Both spouses tended to be involved in the activities. Both men and women took part in the training sessions and orientation meeting. However, it is likely that most decisions were made by the men, after the women had shared their ideas. Work load: providing the external inputs, construction and the heavy manual labour were done by the men. Maintenance work: watering, mulching and grass cutting was shared between men and women. Digging and fencing were performed in "hashars" - community labour groups. As women spend more time at home working within their households, they tend to perform more maintenance work on the plot compared to men. Other activities away from the farms are important to the family budget providing a means of extra income. This often includes men’s long term migration to Russia to find work.

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:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Implementation of land tenure rights at a local level was also a major barrier.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): There is a soil and water conservation project in place to manage water runoff, soil erosion and gully formation. Low land productivity only allows for wheat production with long fallow periods. Improper pasture management has led to overall overgrazing.

Nomadism: animals taken to summer pastures

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: animal graze around villages

Ranching: no practice

Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing: almost extinct

Improved pasture: no practice at all

Clear felling of (semi-)natural forests: No selection in times of electricity cuts in winter season.

Forest products and services: timber, fuelwood, fruits and nuts, grazing / browsing, other forest products / uses (honey, medical, etc.), nature conservation / protection

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Mixed: Mf: Agroforestry

Constraints of infrastructure network (roads, railways, pipe lines, power lines): no irrigation network, heavy transports costs

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):

• Agroforestry

Comments:

Grazing land: Ge: Extensive grazing land

3.4 Water supply

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, mixed rainfed - irrigated, rainfed

Water supply: post-flooding

post-flooding

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures, vegetative measures, structural measures, management measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, contour planting / strip cropping, mulching, legume inter-planting, manure / compost / residues, zero tillage / no-till, pits

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour, aligned: -graded strips *³, aligned: -along boundary

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: soil management (Tillage on steep slope >35%.), deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (Natural tree and shrubs removed completely.), over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use, overgrazing (Stocking rates do exceed the standards in multiple times), disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff) (Run-off is induced by maximum removal of vegetation cover.), land tenure (Unclear land right situation induces irresponsible attitudes.), inputs and infrastructure: (roads, markets, distribution of water points, other, …) (Very limited infrastructure development, vital infrastructure points are a long distance away.)

Secondary causes of degradation: Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts) (Induces gully formation and mass movement.), droughts (If vegetation is dry then less soil cover is provided.), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (The gradient is over 30%.), population pressure (Large family sizes, and high growth rates causes increased need for food and living space in the area.), poverty / wealth (Very limited financial power to develop the land.), labour availability (Though cheap labour is available, it takes much effort to organise communities to work together for SLM activities.), education, access to knowledge and support services (Basic schooling of children, no state provided extension or training after school age.), war and conflicts (The after-effects of recent civil war still have some influence.), governance / institutional (Communist attitudes still persist, very slow institutional development.)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation, rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Somoni

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

4.5

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Planting seedlings in contour ditches	February-March
2.	Planting seedlings and bushes along the perimeter	March
3.	Cost of seedlings: frutiouse and firewood trees	February -March
4.	Gradual terracing by Broadening the ditch onslope and extending the raiser downslope	every spring during 5 years
5.	Membership fees
6.	Attending the training
7.	Management of staff
8.	Taxes
9.	Membership fees
10.	None

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	Labour		1.0	355.0	355.0	100.0
Labour	Mulching		1.0	4.5	4.5	100.0
Labour	Planting seedlings in contour ditches	person days	20.0	4.4	88.0	100.0
Labour	Planting seedlings and bushes along the perimeter	person days	10.0	4.4	44.0	100.0
Equipment	Set of shovels, hoes, picks	Set	1.0	66.0	66.0	50.0
Plant material	mulching		1.0	4.5	4.5	100.0
Plant material	seedlings		1.0	333.0	333.0	50.0
Plant material	Seedlings: frutiouse and firewood trees	ha	500.0	0.666	333.0	50.0
Construction material	Wood frame	Piece	1.0	3.0	3.0	100.0
Other	Labour: Gradual terracing by Broadening the ditch onslope and extending the raiser downslope	person days	150.0	0.68	102.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					1333.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					296.22

Comments:

Number of parties sharing for Mulching, tools, labour and a wood frame: 5
Lifespan for tools and wood frame: 5 years
Life span of mulching: 3 years

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Drip irrigation with plastic bottles	first 3 years
2.	Mulching	once a year
3.	Shaping the trees, cutting branches	Autumn
4.	Shaping the trees, cutting branches	Autumn
5.	Grafting	March
6.	Manuring	March
7.	None	None

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	Drip irrigation with plastic bottles	person days	15.0	4.44	66.6	100.0
Labour	Mulching	person days	5.0	4.44	22.2	100.0
Labour	Shaping the trees, cutting branches	person days	5.0	4.44	22.2	100.0
Labour	Grafting	person days	5.0	4.44	22.2	100.0
Plant material	mulching		1.0	22.0	22.0	100.0
Other	Labour: Manuring	person days	3.0	4.4	13.2	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					168.4
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					37.42

Comments:

Labour costs apply to the cultivation of the whole 7ha plot.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The most affecting factors were the high cost inputs for construction material which usually has to be imported into the area: Fuel, metal nets for fencing, cement, etc.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

Comments and further specifications on topography:

hilly area, located on the foot of Vakhsh mountain range; micro watersheds feeding the bigger watershed of the Kyzylsu river

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

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: Very few women are trusted to run a farm or make decisions about land use. Usually women have taken leading roles only if the men leave the family for long term migration, or have died. Only 8 women in the whole district are farm owners out of the total of 350 existing farms.
Women's involvement and level of freedom given to them are influenced by existing patriarchal values, and in many areas women often remain unaware of their rights.

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 1% - 2%

3% of the land users are very rich and own 20% of the land.
5% of the land users are rich and own 10% of the land.
10% of the land users are average wealthy and own 40% of the land.
60% of the land users are poor and own 20% of the land.
22% of the land users are poor and own 10% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: Complemented by salary from state job, NGO activity, transport service and construction work in capital town and other regions, labour migration to Russia.

Market orientation of production system: subsistence (self-supply), subsistence (self-supply), subsistence (self-supply), mixed (subsistence/ commercial, mixed (subsistence/ commercial, commercial/ market

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:

• state

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

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

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	not well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

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

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	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

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

4 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: Project subsidised only 50% of material inputs.

Comments on adoption trend: Metal for the net was costly- farmers had to convince the project to subsidise prior to adoption, otherwise would reject adopting (area has high risk of crop damage- high livestock density, grazing not controlled).
Year following implementation: 3 farmers in neighbourhood have adopted on own funds; much more are willing to adopt, but need external support

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
It helped to acquire more land user rights.
Land users feel they have an increased status in local society.
It has good potential for replication in other areas. How can they be sustained / enhanced? It would be better if the more expensive parts of the input were subsidised.
Good long term perspectives for improvement of livelihoods.
It allows a positive long term change in household provision regarding food, employment and energy sources, allowing more spare time for cultural events and education.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
It made possible the change to more sustainable land management techniques.
The technology is well suited to the sloping landscape and is easy to adopt.
The technology allows the use of locally available materials, and has low maintenance costs.
It fits well to the local needs for land reclamation and conservation, and sits within the legislative frameworks. How can they be sustained / enhanced? There has been a recent state decree to encourage promotion of orchard development.
It has a positive effect on the areas downstream. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Prior to implementation of the technology, areas downstream were often were damaged by floods.

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?
It needed some immediate on-site adjustments when structuring the half moon cuttings in the contour ditches.	The farmer's opinion should be considered during the adoption of the technology, and to assist with any changes made.
It caused some disagreements between the farmers and the consultant over what part of the material input should be subsidised.	The consultant should try to ensure they understand the social and economic factors affecting the locals.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Needs more until the final structure is finished	This depends on the length and intensity of any precipitation/drought/dry spells etc.
It is a new technology in this area so will need some time to be proven effective.
External knowledge is needed for the establishment and maintainance of the technology.
Extra workers are needed for the complementary drip irrigation - child labour is often used for this.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Scetch map of Khirob Microwatershed

Available from where? Costs?

DWHH Baljuvon Office

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Interim Narrative Report 01.05.2009-30.04.2010 Project TAJ 1068

Available from where? Costs?

DWHH Baljuvon Office

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Grant Application Form to EU Commision: "Individual incomes & Improving Living Standards in Khatlon and Sughd Regions", Tajikistan

Available from where? Costs?

DWHH Regional Office, Dushanbe mail to: