Soil bund & Fanya Juu combined & vegetated [Ethiopia]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: Daniel Danano
- Editor: –
- Reviewers: Fabian Ottiger, Alexandra Gavilano
technologies_1078 - Ethiopia
View sections
Expand all Collapse all1. General information
1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology
SLM specialist:
Dibaba Israel
Rural land administration and natural resources management
Ethiopia
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - Italy1.3 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
2. Description of the SLM Technology
2.1 Short description of the Technology
Definition of the Technology:
Soil bund and Fanya Juu constructed along the contour lines in microwatershed to conserve soil moisture and control erosion.
2.2 Detailed description of the Technology
Description:
Soil bund and Fanya Juu constructed in combination in a microwatershed for retaining maximum possible rain water in the soil by obstructing runoff water. Soil bunds are suitable for steeper slopes compared to fanya juu terraces which are more effective in gentle and flatter slopes.Land users in the SWC area prefer to combine the two physical structures for many reasons.One important factor is the cost of establishment, which is a function of labour needed for the construction. Fanya juu which means throwing soil upslope in Kiswahili intails throwing soil upslope which is more labours than throwing soil to downslope in the case of soil bunds. The other reason is that cultivated lands with fanya juu terraces are not easily accessed by free grazing livestock. The ditches placed in the downslope side of the embankment (fanya juu) is not easily vrossable but in soil bund although not that easy livestock are seen to trample over the embankment and jump the ditch which is placed in the upslope side. The other advantage farmers consider is that Fanya juu is more efficient in controlling runoff because the water that overtops the embankment is trapped by the ditch. Fanya Juu despite its high cost is preferred to be applied in combination with bunds because of the other advantage that it forms bench terrace rapidly.
Purpose of the Technology: The major purpose is to trap as much rain water as possible and also control soil erosion. Cultivated lands with with Soil bund and Fanya Juu have shown remarkable improvement in soil moistureavailability to crops compared to fields with no measures.
Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Soil bund and Fanya Juu are established in the same way by digging soil from and embanking it on a contour line. A contour line is laid out by following zero gradient. Once the soil is dug and embanked it is lightly compacted to avoid colapse. To further ensure bund stabilityuseful trees/shrubs are planted.The planted tree/shrub species are those offering multiuses such as fodder, fertility improving and fuelwood. Maintenance: It is done by repairing breaks and managing planted trees on the structure or by upgrading the structure by increasing its height and plant improved tree and fruit tree species.
Natural / human environment: The technology is suitable to semiarid climatic condition which have erratic rains and where crop production is limited by soil moisture stress. Soils in the technology area are susceptable to erosion and therefore the structure should be stablized by planting trees or grass species.
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
Ethiopia
Region/ State/ Province:
Oromia
Further specification of location:
Oromia
Comments:
Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 15 km2.
Soil and water conservation activities started in the area about 30 years ago by the extension program of the Ministry of Agriculture. Systematically planned SWC measures, however, came into picture recently as Integrated microwatersheds planning & implementation approach was introduced.
Map
×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
Comments (type of project, etc.):
Fanya juu is first practiced in Kenya and soil bunds are also exotic but experienced widely in Ethiopia over the past 30 years.
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology
- reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
- conserve ecosystem
3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied
Cropland
- Annual cropping
- Perennial (non-woody) cropping
- Tree and shrub cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
- cereals - maize
- cereals - other
- cereals - sorghum
- legumes and pulses - beans
- oilseed crops - sunflower, rapeseed, other
- teff, wheat
- local, elephant grass
- casea seame, leucanea, sesbania
Specify:
Longest growing period in days: 210 Longest growing period from month to month: Apr - Nov
Is intercropping practiced?
Yes
If yes, specify which crops are intercropped:
sorghum-teff-beans
Grazing land
Forest/ woodlands
Comments:
Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Soil erosion, productivity decline, degraded grazing and forest lands, soil moisture stress.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Poor crop production, high fertilizer cost, lack of grazing land.
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)
Grazing land
Intensive grazing/ fodder production:
- Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing
Forest/ woodlands
- Tree plantation, afforestation
Products and services:
- Fuelwood
- Fruits and nuts
- Grazing/ browsing
Comments:
cut and carry, weeding and cultivation and proper management.
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
- cross-slope measure
- surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
agronomic measures
- A3: Soil surface treatment
A3: Differentiate tillage systems:
A 3.2: Reduced tillage (> 30% soil cover)
Comments:
Main measures: structural measures
Secondary measures: vegetative measures, management measures
Type of agronomic measures: early planting, mixed cropping / intercropping, contour planting / strip cropping, legume inter-planting, manure / compost / residues, mineral (inorganic) fertilizers, minimum tillage, contour tillage
Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour, scattered / dispersed
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
soil erosion by water
- Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
- Wg: gully erosion/ gullying
chemical soil deterioration
- Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
physical soil deterioration
- Pk: slaking and crusting
Comments:
Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion
Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Pk: sealing and crusting
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
Comments:
Secondary goals: rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land
4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):
Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high
Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate
Main technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard
Secondary technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, reduction of slope angle, reduction of slope length
Early planting
Material/ species: sorghum and maize
Quantity/ density: 80-100000
Remarks: broadcasting
Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: sorghum-teff-beans
Remarks: broadcasting
Contour planting / strip cropping
Material/ species: maize, sunflower
Agronomic measure: mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: wheat-safflower
Remarks: broadcasting
Legume inter-planting
Remarks: field crops (safflower sunflower)
Manure / compost / residues
Remarks: at homesteads
Mineral (inorganic) fertilizers
Material/ species: Dap, Urea
Quantity/ density: 1.5 q/ha
Minimum tillage
Remarks: at pilot level for maize planting
Contour tillage
Remarks: For cereal crops on terraced cultivated lands
Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 400
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 50-100
Trees/ shrubs species: casea seame, leucanea, sesbania
Grass species: local, elephant grass
Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 5.00%
If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is (see figure below): 2.00%
Gradient along the rows / strips: 1.00%
Waterway
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1.5m
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 3m
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 500m
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.5m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 3m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 3m
Bund/ bank: level
Spacing between structures (m): 1.5m
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5m
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1m
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 150m
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.65m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.5m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 150m
Structural measure: diversion ditch / cut-off drain
Spacing between structures (m): 200m
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.75m
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 120m
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 150m
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.75m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.2m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 150m
Construction material (earth): soil bund and fanya juu
Construction material (stone): waterways and diversions
Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 5%
If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is: 2%
Lateral gradient along the structure: 0%
For water harvesting: the ratio between the area where the harvested water is applied and the total area from which water is collected is: 1:1
Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.
Change of land use type: cut and carry, weeding and cultivation and proper management.
Other type of management: site guarding - 0vergrazed lands are closed for establishing vegetation.
4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
other/ national currency (specify):
Birr
If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:
8.6
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:
0.80
4.3 Establishment activities
Activity | Timing (season) | |
---|---|---|
1. | collecting seeds | dry season |
2. | seedling production | dry season |
3. | seedling planting | rainy season |
4. | direct sowing of seeds | rainy season |
5. | contour marking | dry season |
6. | embanking soils | dry season |
7. | light compaction | dry season |
8. | fencing | dry season |
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 | ha | 1.0 | 199.0 | 199.0 | 20.0 |
Equipment | Tools | ha | 63.0 | 5.0 | ||
Plant material | Seeds | ha | 1.0 | 8.0 | 8.0 | 100.0 |
Total costs for establishment of the Technology | 207.0 | |||||
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD | 24.07 |
Comments:
Duration of establishment phase: 84 month(s)
4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities
Activity | Timing/ frequency | |
---|---|---|
1. | tillage /primary) | |
2. | tillage/secondary/ | |
3. | seedbed preartaion | |
4. | planting/sowing | |
5. | Weeding | |
6. | cultivation | |
7. | weeding and cultivation | after rains /annual |
8. | replanting | during rains /annual |
9. | repair breaks | after rains/as required |
10. | upgrading | dry season/annual |
11. | upgrading and repairing of breaks | before rains / annual |
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 | Labour | ha | 1.0 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 100.0 |
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology | 13.0 | |||||
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD | 1.51 |
Comments:
length of terrace, number of trees planted
4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs
Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:
slope, soil condition labour availability
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:
800.00
Agro-climatic zone
- semi-arid
Charachterized by high tempretures, windy and soil moisture stress
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.
Comments and further specifications on topography:
Landforms: Hill slopes (are largley cultivated and some grazing lands, ranked 1), valley floors (are totally cultivated lands and have potentials if suffiecent rains are received, ranked 2) and mountain slopes (are grazing and shrub lands. Valley floors depend for runoff water from this, ranked 3)
Slopes on average: Flat (bunds were built before but silted up due to soil burial, ranked 1), rolling (ranked 2) as well as gentle and moderate (both ranked 3)
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):
- medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
- medium (1-3%)
- low (<1%)
If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.
Soil depth on average: Moderately deep (soils on gentle slopes where the technology is dominantly practiced, ranked 1), shallow (soils on hillslopes are predominantly , ranked 2) and deep (soils in the valley floors are moderately deep to deep, ranked 3)
Soil texture is medium (on gentle slopes and valley floors, ranked 1) and coarse/light (on hilly slopes and gentle slopes, ranked 2) and fine/heavy (ranked 3)
Soil fertility is very low (soils that are continuously cropped on gentle slopes, ranked 1), low (soils on steep slopes because of erosion, ranked 2) and medium (soils on valley floors because of deposited soils, ranked 3)
Topsoil organic matter is low (soils of shallow depth on hillslopes, ranked 1) and medium (soils on valley floors, ranked 2)
Soil drainage/infiltration is good
Soil water storage capacity is low (shallow soils on the hillslopes, ranked 1) and medium (soils in the valley floors, ranked 2)
5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology
Market orientation of production system:
- subsistence (self-supply)
- mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
- 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
- average
- rich
Level of mechanization:
- manual work
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:
Population density: 100-200 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 2% - 3%
5% of the land users are rich (have means to pay labour).
35% of the land users are average wealthy (get organized in groups for labour share).
60% of the land users are poor (are beneficiaries of food for work).
Off-farm income specification: land users who have implemented SWC measures have better income compared with those who have not implemented SWC.
Level of mechanization: Manual labour (land is tilled by oxen plough)
Market orientation cropland: Subsistence (poor and average farmers produced for themselves, ranked 1) and mixed (better of and rich produce food for own consumption and also market, ranked 2)
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
Comments:
Most land users have land holding less than 1 hectar and fragmented
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- state
Land use rights:
- open access (unorganized)
- individual
6. Impacts and concluding statements
6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown
Socio-economic impacts
Production
crop production
Comments/ specify:
due to soil moisture improvement
fodder production
Comments/ specify:
bund stablization and area enclosure
fodder quality
Comments/ specify:
bund stablization and area enclosure
Income and costs
farm income
Comments/ specify:
homesteads intensification
Socio-cultural impacts
community institutions
Comments/ specify:
farmers' groups for development work getting strengthened
SLM/ land degradation knowledge
Comments/ specify:
land users have developed skills in marking contours and constructing bunds.
Ecological impacts
Water cycle/ runoff
surface runoff
Quantity before SLM:
50
Quantity after SLM:
0
Soil
soil moisture
Comments/ specify:
because of structural measures
soil loss
Comments/ specify:
integrated measures
Other ecological impacts
Soil fertility
Comments/ specify:
leguminous plants and compost application
6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown
downstream flooding
Comments/ specify:
because of reduced runoff on uphills
downstream siltation
Comments/ specify:
reduce soil erosion
6.4 Cost-benefit analysis
How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:
slightly negative
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
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
- 0-10%
Comments:
95% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
Comments on acceptance with external material support: estimates
5% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates
There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology
Comments on adoption trend: Spontaneous adoption is being observed who are average in wealth in particular and in families who have adequate awarness of SWC measures in general.
6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view |
---|
Structures do not hinder farm operations because they are widely spaced. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Practice inter bund measures that trap runoff efficiently. |
Fodder is grown on bunds and there is no area lost How can they be sustained / enhanced? Strengthening the introduction of high yielding fodder species. |
Homestead intensification activities are integrated with the SWC technology. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Embrace more land in the program |
Crop, fodder and wood production increased because of plantation, structures and area enclosures. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Use more efficient techniques and inputs that enhance soil fertility. |
Crop production has increased because of improved soil moisture avalability. |
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? |
---|---|
are labour consuming | organize farmers in groups and undertake repairs before the damage gets more serious |
require frequent maintenance |
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view | How can they be overcome? |
---|---|
require regular maintenance | make quality structures and avoid livestock interference |
require closer protection and guarding | practice more cut and carry |
7. References and links
7.1 Methods/ sources of information
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
No links
Modules
No modules