Technologies

Vallerani System [Burkina Faso]

technologies_1528 - Burkina Faso

Completeness: 94%

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)

SLM specialist:
land user:

Long Allain

Reach Afrique, NGO

Burkina Faso

SLM specialist:

Lindo Grandi

Deserto Verde Burkinabé, NGO

Switzerland

land user:

Boureima Amadou

Reach Afrique

Burkina Faso

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Book project: Water Harvesting – Guidelines to Good Practice (Water Harvesting)
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Reach Africa (Reach Africa)
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Reach Italia (Reach Italia) - Italy

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

2012/2018

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:

A special tractor-pulled plow that constructs micro-catchments. It combines the traditional techniques of rainwater harvesting with mechanization for large scale land rehabilitation.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The Technology mechanizes the traditional technique of zai and semi circular bunds for water harvesting using a modified plow named Delfino3s pulled by a 180hp tractor. A normal plow on flat land excavates a symmetrical, continuous furrow, and earth piles up equally on both sides of the furrow. The Delfino3s plow has a single reversible plowshare that creates an angled furrow and piles up the excavated soil in half moon shaped ridges only on the downhill side. The plowing must be done along the contour to collect and slows down runoff water as it flows downhill. The plow’s blade moves in and out of the soil creating micro basins about 5 meters long, 50 cm deep, 50 cm wide and spaced 2-3 m. The ripper placed before the plow cracks up the soil to a depth of 70 cm facilitating the infiltration of water into the soil profile and the growth of deep roots. After plowing, the local population sows seeds of plants of indigenous species. They are sown along the ridges of the basins and in the furrow of the ripper. While for most species seeds are collected by the local population, for species rarely present in the region, seeds are purchased from tree nurseries. Sowing the manure of goat containing seeds has also been very successful with about 95% of all micro basin having at least one tree growing. The intervention on a big scale, the effects of water infiltration in depth, erosion reduction and vegetation growth, boost a long lasting rehabilitation process. Each day the Delfino plow can plow up to 20 ha, digging 6.000-7.000 micro basins. The speed, the capability to plow hard, abbandoned land, the effectiveness of the Delfino3s plow are its major advantages for the ecosystem rehabilitation process but require a big commitment. To make the best out of it, a great motivation and organizational work is necessary to: find great availability of land; train accuratelly the technicians; have well-rooted Subjects in the region. The technological aspect is just part of the recovery process, an important work with the Communities is required upstream and downstream. Communities are involved in the management process – in identifying the areas to be restored, clarifying the land uses of the affected areas, planning and implementing e.g. gathering and keeping seeds of local ecotypes, sowing, in the management of plantations and in the monitoring and evaluation of the results. Rules for SLM are adopted and respected by all. The Technology is applied in a degraded agro-sylvo-pastoral area of the Sahel Region, in the north east of Burkina Faso with 200-500 mm of annual rainfall. The soil is sandy-loam, strongly degraded with surface crust. The population is mainly composed of semi-nomadic herders. At the beginning of the project, the NGO Reach Italia was promoting schooling; they soon realized that during the dry season most kids left school and that to avoid it they should face food security and pasture improvement. So they started applying the Vallerani System and developped the participatory approach. The vegetation growth reduces the need for fodder search and long-range transhumance which also allows children to go to school regularly.The ecosystem rehabilitation effect of the technology help the communities to become more concious and resilient to the effects of climate change and prepared to cope with the socio-economic-environmental changes they are faced with.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.4 Videos of the Technology

Comments, short description:

A short video that introduces the Vallerani System.The video has been shot in the project area.

Date:

14/05/2014

Location:

Oudalan, Burkina Faso

Name of videographer:

Jonathan van Laamsverde

Comments, short description:

ICARDA Vallerani –Technology transfer from Morocco to Jordan.
The presentation of the ICARDA Minared project applying the Vallerani System for rangeland rehabilitation in the Jordan Badia.

Date:

16/06/2016

Location:

Badia, Jordan

Comments, short description:

REACH – DESERTO VERDE BURKINABe' Vallerani - Recupero Terre in Burkina Faso Sicurezza Alimentare.
Reach Italia and Deserto Verde Burkinabé present the project of soil rehabilitation and food security in Burkina Faso. Italian text.

Date:

01/09/2009

Location:

Oudalan, Burkina Faso

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

Country:

Burkina Faso

Region/ State/ Province:

Sahel Region

Comments:

Since the project is going on since 2002, it is possible to see implemented sites in different stadium of rehabilitation. The plowing lines are clearly visible.

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

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

The Technology was introduced in the Region in an agro-sylvo-pastoral pilot project to fight against desertification by FAO in 1996-97.

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact

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

Grazing land

Grazing land

Extensive grazing land:
  • Semi-nomadism/ pastoralism
Intensive grazing/ fodder production:
  • Improved pastures
Main animal species and products:

Goats, cattle.

Unproductive land

Unproductive land

Specify:

Hard abbandoned land

Remarks:

Especially at the beginning of the project, some communities agreed to try the system on their most unproductive land. After seeing the results, they started to request the intervention on less degraded soil and on fields that are closer to their villages.

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Land degradation-desertification with reduction of vegetation cover in terms of plant density and species diversity is the main problem: disappearance of grasses and trees, reduction of the size of the plants that are resistant and of the biological activity of the soil. Runoff, water and wind erosion increase. Drought and irregular precipitation have heavy consequences on soil fertility, availability of water for humans and livestock, and recharging groundwater.

3.3 Further information about land use

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • rainfed
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • agroforestry
  • pastoralism and grazing land management
  • water harvesting

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 100-1,000 km2
Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology in the Region is about 25.600 hectares up to 2017.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A1: Vegetation/ soil cover
  • A3: Soil surface treatment
  • A4: Subsurface treatment
vegetative measures

vegetative measures

  • V1: Tree and shrub cover
  • V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants
structural measures

structural measures

  • S2: Bunds, banks
  • S4: Level ditches, pits
management measures

management measures

  • M1: Change of land use type
  • M2: Change of management/ intensity level
  • M3: Layout according to natural and human environment

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
  • Wo: offsite degradation effects
soil erosion by wind

soil erosion by wind

  • Et: loss of topsoil
  • Eo: offsite degradation effects
chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

  • Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
physical soil deterioration

physical soil deterioration

  • Pc: compaction
  • Pk: slaking and crusting
  • Pu: loss of bio-productive function due to other activities
biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
  • Bh: loss of habitats
  • Bq: quantity/ biomass decline
  • Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline
  • Bl: loss of soil life
water degradation

water degradation

  • Ha: aridification
  • Hg: change in groundwater/aquifer level
Comments:

Main causes of degradation: over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use , such as wood cut for cooking, to feed livestock or as building material, overgrazing, low contribution of animal dejections that are used as cooking fuel, change of seasonal rainfall, droughts. Secondary causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), low environmental awareness and support services such as forestal or veterinary assistance.

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

Author:

Patrizia Kolb

Date:

10/10/2013

Author:

Sabina Vallerani

Date:

04/04/2017

Author:

Sabina Vallerani

Date:

25/04/2018

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Drawing 1) A. The land chosen together with the local population is plowed with the special Delfino3s plow. The spacing between the plowed lines depend on: slope, soil and rain characteristics, purpose of the project. In average the inter-line is 4-6m wide. B. Local people sow seeds (collected from local trees or bought if species are rare) or goat dung containing seeds (collected in the night enclosures after feeding the goats shaking trees with ripe seeds). C. The micro basins collect the rain that falls into the crescents and up to 90% of the runoff water. The water easily penetrates into the soil profile, remains available to plant roots without risk of evaporation and eventually infiltrates to the groundwater. Drawing 2) All plowing measures are adjustable. Total length of work: 4/8 m. Tractor required: 180hp. Working speed: 4/7 Km/h which correspond to 1,5/2.5ha per hour. Weight of the plough: 1800 Kg. Drawing 3) To optimize run off harvesting and reduce water erosion, the ploughing must always be done along the contour. The bare soil between the tilled lines works as catchment area for the collection of runoff. To facilitate the execution of the plowing along the contour, nowadays there are new technologies such as laser guidance systems or GPS assistence.

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

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

100 hectares

Specify currency used for cost calculations:
  • US Dollars
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

2.5

4.4 Establishment activities

Activity Type of measure Timing
1. Project planning, consulting and training Other measures Before starting
2. Plowing with the Delfino plow Structural Dry season
3. Seed harvesting and storage Agronomic When seeds are ripe
4. Missing seeds purchase in local markets or nurseries Agronomic When seeds are ripe
5. Direct sowing Agronomic Dry season

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

The NGO REACH AFRICA which implements the project is also supported by REACH ITALIA which mainly works for foundraising. They have many different founders. After the first years, thanks to the collaboration and founding by the Swiss Association Deserto Verde Burkinabé and the good results achieved, founders are more likelly to be found. The main are: different NGO's, some Italian Municipalities, a Swiss school, the Gouvernement of Burkina Faso, FAO, international cooperation agencies of Luxembourg and Belgium, a mining company and others.

Comments:

The actual (2018) total cost of each implemented hectare is $ 170. This cost can be considerably reduced by around 22% in the case of an optimal use of the Technical Mechanization Unit, ie 800-1000 hours of work per year. This means that an operator who works with the plow Delfino has a gross investment cost which can vary according to its technical and organizational experience and by the amount of the plowed surface each year.

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Type of measure Timing/ frequency
1. Pasture management to avoid overgrazing Vegetative After the rain and in the dry season
2. Vegetation growth management Vegetative During the first 3-5 years
3. Woodcut management Vegetative After 4-7 years
4. Equipment maintenance (plow, tactor) Management Daily, weekly, seasonal

4.7 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

The NGO REACH AFRICA which implements the project is also supported by REACH ITALIA which mainly works for foundraising. They have many different founders. After the first years, thanks to the collaboration and founding by the Swiss Association Deserto Verde Burkinabé and the good results achieved, founders are more likelly to be found. The main are: different NGO's, some Italian Municipalities, a Swiss school, the Gouvernement of Burkina Faso, FAO, international cooperation agencies of Luxembourg and Belgium, a mining company and others.

Comments:

Maintenance costs of plow and tractor greatly depend from the attention and technical skills of tractor drivers and mechanics and from the diligence and frequency of the maintenance activities of the implements. No other maintenance costs are forseen for the Technology.

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Upfront costs for the aquisition of the required implements are around 40,000 EUR for the plow and 75,000 EUR for the tractor. Depending on the maintenance activities, the spares and fuel costs can be reduced. Fuel, oil and spares also greatly depend from the characteristics of the soil and the purpose of the project.

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
Specifications/ comments on rainfall:

Dry season from oktober to may, rainy season from june to september. There's a great climate variability with unexpeced dry periods or areas in the rainy season. In the last years climate change effects are experienced in the region with raise in temperature, droughts and rain variability increase. Some Community claim that since the rehabilitation of big degraded areas it rains more regularly and abbundant.

Indicate the name of the reference meteorological station considered:

Dori, Burkina Faso

Agro-climatic zone
  • semi-arid
  • arid

Thermal climate class: subtropics. Average temperature 30°C

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:
  • not relevant

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):
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • low (<1%)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

> 50 m

Availability of surface water:

medium

Water quality (untreated):

poor drinking water (treatment required)

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Generally the watertable is lowering. Surface water is collected in boulies (ponds) for livestock and household activities. Its quality deteriorates during the dry season and its quantity decreases fast.

5.5 Biodiversity

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

Up to 30-50 years ago biodiversity was rich and soil coverage higher.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Sedentary or nomadic:
  • Semi-nomadic
Market orientation of production system:
  • subsistence (self-supply)
Off-farm income:
  • less than 10% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • very poor
  • poor
Individuals or groups:
  • groups/ community
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
Gender:
  • women
  • men
Age of land users:
  • youth
  • middle-aged
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

During the dry season men often migrate(d) to the nearby mines or cities for off-site income. After the implementation of the Technology the need for seasonal migration reduced. Difference in gender involvement: the project involves reforestation and pasture improvement for the grazing of livestock which is a men dominated activity. Since 2010 women have sown and protected from grazing some special plants for medical and domestic use and as raw material for handcrafts. Population density: 10-50 persons/km2. Annual population growth: 3% - 4%. Off-farm income specification: The only activity people of the region are engaged in is goat and cattle breading. Crop production is practiced only for subsistence use.

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased 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)?
  • small-scale
  • large-scale
Comments:

The Technology is applied on land that remains in use to the local population (it's mainly land owned by the State, the Region or the Municipality and given in use to the local Communities). the amenaged sites vary from 40 ha to 150ha in each Village. Up to december 2017 a total of more than 25.600ha have been amenaged.

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

Land ownership:
  • state
  • communal/ village
Land use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
Water use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)

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
Quantity after SLM:

2-4 times

Comments/ specify:

Crop production and biomass augmented 2-4 times compared with traditional cultural techniques.

fodder production

decreased
increased
Quantity before SLM:

90kg/MS/ha

Quantity after SLM:

1250kg/MS/ha

Comments/ specify:

Grass fodder production increased by a factor of 5–30 compared with unmanaged land. The production of herbaceous biomass varied from 420 kg to 2.090 kg (dry matter) per ha; thus, on average, 1.250 kg of herbaceous biomass (dry matter) per ha developed on sites where the Vallerani system was deployed, compared with an average of 90 kg (dry matter) per ha in control plots. Vegetation is mainly distributed inside and around the micro basins.

fodder quality

decreased
increased
Quantity before SLM:

12 floral species

Quantity after SLM:

44 floral species

Comments/ specify:

The application of the Technology boosts a regenaration process increasing year by year. Compared to the surrounding control rangelands, fodder quality and biodiversity increased with a high proportion of grassland species of good forage value, such as Panicum laetum and Schonefeldia gracilis, and the return of legume species such as Alysicarpus ovalifolius and Zornia glochidiata also testify the improvement of the quality of the reconstituted pastures.

animal production

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

The increase of fodder quantity and quality represents a surplus of 22–106 grazing days per tropical cattle unit per hectare. This extra fodder supply reduces the need to make long-range transhumance or cut shrubs to meet livestock needs for fodder, even in years where pasture is low. Livestock is fed with more and better quality fodder so its productivity and market price increase.

wood production

decreased
increased

forest/ woodland quality

decreased
increased
Quantity before SLM:

20 trees/ha of 6 species

Quantity after SLM:

700 trees/ha of 14 species

Comments/ specify:

Significant improvement in forest cover (700 live trees and shrubbs per ha, on average) and biodiversity: trees are capable of spontaneous growth even with open access to grazing and in years of high water stress.

non-wood forest production

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Berries, gum arabica, resins, fruits.

risk of production failure

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

The increased fodder quantity, quality and biodiversity, the deep root system of the sown plants, increase resilience of the ecosystem and reduce the risk of production failure. The increased biodiversity, soil moisture and fertility increase the resilience of plants to attacks by pests, deseases and drought. Even in the case of severe drought, there are some plants that can be used as "emergency food" by humans and animals.

product diversity

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

The implementation of the Technology gives the opportunity to diversify the production. Next to animal breeding, agriculture has intensified and in some villages the production of handicrafts, food processing, hunting and tourism activities are developping. Berries, gum arabica, resins, fruits enrich the family diet or can be sold at markets. Wild animals, insects, reptiles and birds have returned after decades and greatelly increased.

production area

decreased
increased
Quantity after SLM:

25.600ha

Comments/ specify:

By the end of 2017 about 25.600 hectares of severelly degraded, abbandoned land has been rehabilitated.

Water availability and quality

drinking water availability

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Local people attest that the rehabilitation of large areas of bare soil augmented the local rain amount and the water level in the wells.

water availability for livestock

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

The rain collected in the micro basins is available for livestock during the rainy season. The augmented rainfall also increases water availability in boulies (ponds).

demand for irrigation water

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

No water is needed for the Technology except for rain.

Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

The implementation cost of the technology is not entirelly sustainable by Communities. donors and founders sustain the project. Large-scale application reduces the cost per hectare and increases the impact of actions in reversing the degradation–desertification trend. The cost of each plowed hectare.

farm income

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Fodder increase in quality and quantity, improve animal health and productivity as well as their market price.

diversity of income sources

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

The Technology increases income for herders and their families also thanks to diversification. More land is also used for agriculture. Selling or transformation of other products such as berries, fruits, gums, resins; hunting; new job opportunities in disadvantaged areas such as tractor drivers, social promoters, seed collectors...The community raises awareness and a potential for small business activities occurs, mainly among women.

economic disparities

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Disadvantaged groups such as women start new economic activities such as mat production and sale at markets, medical plants and food production. They diversify their income and improve their status in the community.

workload

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

5 micro basins/day

Quantity after SLM:

6.000 micro basins/day

Comments/ specify:

Each man can dig 5 micro basins per day doing a heavy work. The plow can dig 6.000-7.000 micro basins per day. As most rangelands, the area of the project has a low human density (29 inhabitants/km2) so people are responsible for seed collection and storage, sowing, the livestock management during the first growing phase, monitoring activities, a.s.o.

Other socio-economic impacts

Migration

Reduced
Increased
Comments/ specify:

Increased and improved fodder availability reduces the need for long-range tranhumance and seasonal or definitive migration to areas with more work opportunities (e.g. mines), cities or other countries.

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

Food security improves with increased and diversified productivity and income. The increased fodder and crop quantity, quality and biodiversity, the deep root system and soil fertility, increase the resilience of the whole ecosystem. Even in the case of severe drought, there are some plants that can be used as "emergency food" by humans and animals.

health situation

worsened
improved
Comments/ specify:

Improved health especially due to better nutrition also for disadvantaged groups such as children and old people: bigger amounts, diversification, milk, vegetables. The reduction of dust storms also improves the health situation.

land use/ water rights

worsened
improved
Comments/ specify:

Awareness rising and discussion of the theme are essential. Due to the great productivity of former degraded and often abandoned land, land use rules and water rights are clearly discussed and defined at the beginning of the project. Rules for SLM are adopted and respected by all; for example, it is forbidden to install camps in or near restored areas, to cut trees, and to mow for commercial purposes.

recreational opportunities

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

Shadow, green areas near the villages increase recreational opportunities.

community institutions

weakened
strengthened
Comments/ specify:

It is essential to involve and give responsibility to local people in every step of the process. Comities and groups such as the women or seniors groups gain relevance and become essential for the sustainability of the project.

national institutions

weakened
strengthened
Comments/ specify:

Collaborations with national institutions such as forestry direction, ministery of environnement and agricolture, research institutes, etc

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

All communities are involved in the management process – identifying the areas and the use of the sites to be restored, planning, and implementing (e.g. gathering and keeping seeds of local ecotypes, manure and sowing). Local villages are involved in the care and defence of new plantations and in the monitoring and evaluation of the results of vegetation growth. Ultimatelly they become responsable for the sustainable management of the whole area.

conflict mitigation

worsened
improved
Comments/ specify:

If land use and water rights are clearly defined, the increased availability of fodder reduces conflicts with neighbours and farmers.

situation of socially and economically disadvantaged groups

worsened
improved

Community well being

worsened
improved
Comments/ specify:

People have more confidence in the future, dignity and hope. The Community cohesion and identity is strenghtened and the community becomes more resilient to conflicts and disasters.

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

water quantity

decreased
increased
Quantity after SLM:

360.000l/ha

Comments/ specify:

With each rain, each micro basin can collect up to 1.200l of water. Each hectare collects an average of 360.000 liter of rain, runoff included. Collected in the micro basin, the water has enough time to infiltrate in the soil profile and eventually in the water table. Local people assert that after the implementation of the Technology, the water level in the wells has raised.

harvesting/ collection of water

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

The Technology allows to harvest 100% of the rain falling in the micro basin and on the ripped furrow as well as up to 90% of the rain falling between the tilled lines. The bare soil between the tilled lines is essential as catchment area, to recieve rainfall and process runoff downstream. The micro basins collect up to 95% of rainfall.

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

5-15%

Quantity after SLM:

90%

Comments/ specify:

Plowing is done along the contour. This is essential to collect the runoff that flows between the tilled lines (catchment area). The distance between the lines can be between 4m and 12m depending from: slope, rain characteristics (quantity, intensity), soil type, surface roughness (runoff coheficient), the purpose of the project (type of plants desired). The technology allows to collect up to 90% of the runoff.

groundwater table/ aquifer

lowered
recharge
Comments/ specify:

Local people assert that after the implementation of the technology, the water level in the wells has raised.

evaporation

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

The rain collected in the micro basins infiltrates in the soil profile being accessible for seeds and roots without evaporating. After the first rains, the micro basins are quickly covered with high grasses that contribute to reduce evaporation.

Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Improved soil hydrodynamic properties: the relative size of capillaries by different soil levels increased and the soil water-retaining capability improved.

soil cover

reduced
improved

soil loss

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Reduced soil loss through runoff reduction and wind erosion.

soil compaction

increased
reduced
Quantity before SLM:

423

Quantity after SLM:

70

Comments/ specify:

At different depth soil compactness reduces from 6 (0 to 20cm) to 1.3 times (40 to 60cm)

nutrient cycling/ recharge

decreased
increased

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased
increased
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Vegetation cover

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Vegetation cover increase 5 to 30 times. Vegetation grows mainly inside and around the micro basins.

biomass/ above ground C

decreased
increased
Quantity before SLM:

70 to 110kg/MS/ha

Quantity after SLM:

420 to 2090 kg/MS/ha

Comments/ specify:

The biomass production increases 5 to 30 times compared to the nearby unplowed soil. On implemented sites, biomass varies from 420 to 2090 kg / DM / ha, on average between 1000 and 1200 kg / ha against 70 to 110kg / DM / ha on control plots.

plant diversity

decreased
increased
Quantity before SLM:

14 herbaceous, 6 woody species/ha

Quantity after SLM:

44 herbaceous, 14 woody species/ha

Comments/ specify:

Floral diversity increases from 14 to 44 species. With a high proportion of graminaceous species of good forage value and the return of more leguminous species. Concerning the diversity of woody plants the results show an average per hectare of 14 species on implemented sites and an average of 6 species on control plots.

animal diversity

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

A great increase of animal biodiversity: insects, birds, reptiles and mammals (such as squirrel, jackals, gazelle...) are observed in the implemented sites.

pest/ disease control

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

The increased vegetal and animal biodiversity, deep root system, soil fertility and water availability, increase the health and resilience capacity of the whole ecosystem.

Climate and disaster risk reduction

flood impacts

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Through water harvesting the rain is retained in the precipitation area and flood risk decreases. If flood occurs in the plowed area before the vegetation is well established, the micro basins can be washed out.

drought impacts

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Increased biodiversity, vegetation cover and soil fertility, deep root system and water storage in the soil profile, increase the resilience to drought of the whole ecosystem. During the project, in years of extreme drought, plants have reduced their growth but most of them survived, were used to feed animals and started growing again in the following rainy season.

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Minimal production of carbon dioxide compared with the potential gain.

fire risk

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

The implementing area remains open to lifestock (regulated pasture) to reduce the high production of grass that could favor the spread of a fire, herders also monitor the territory. There is a high level of community involvement and a growing ecological awareness.

wind velocity

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

The great number of growing trees reduce the wind speed.

micro-climate

worsened
improved
Comments/ specify:

Local people attest that the Technology locally increased the amount of rain and reduced dust storms in number and intensity.

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

water availability

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Local people tell that the rehabilitation of large areas of bare soil augmented the local rain amount and the water level in the wells.

wind transported sediments

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

Wind intensity and dust storms reduction thanks to soil coverage and wind brake effect by trees and shrubs.

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 Type of climatic change/ extreme How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature increase very well
seasonal temperature dry season increase very well
annual rainfall decrease well
seasonal rainfall wet/ rainy season decrease well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm moderately
local sandstorm/ duststorm very well
local windstorm very well
Hydrological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
flash flood not well
Biological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
insect/ worm infestation well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

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

positive

Long-term returns:

very positive

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

positive

Long-term returns:

very positive

Comments:

The system includes the use of a heavy duty tractor and a special plow whose costs are high though difficult to sustain by the local population. Most financial costs are covered by founders and donors, the land user's partecipate to the project with their work so even if the benefits in the short term are fewer than in the mid and long-term, for them it is still very positive.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • 10-50%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

330 villages and around 33.000 beneficiaries

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 50-90%
Comments:

Except for plowing, the other activities part of the Technology are practicable by the population under an initial guidance of a promoter with specific training. These are done without any material incentives/payments. The technology is well known in the Region and there is an active participation of the local people and a strong demand for new interventions.

6.6 Adaptation

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

Yes

other (specify):

technical

Specify adaptation of the Technology (design, material/ species, etc.):

The design of the plow has been adapted to increase the performance of the implement and reduce the running costs of plowing. The reversibility of the plowshare reduces the need for empty rides. The different parts of the plow are adjustable to adapt it to the needs of the project and the soil characteristics.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Higly degraded, abandoned land becomes fertile and rentable again. Fodder increases in quantity and improves in quality and lasts all year round. Food security also in drought years. Herds are healthier and more productive. Fodder and water availability for animals is closer to the villages. Some plants can be sown for different uses: crops, medicine or for the production of mats or other handcrafts products that can be sold.
Better life conditions, more income opportunities and diversification. Food is diversified and more nutritious. Less hunger and deseases.
Greater community cohesion and less migration, better environnemental conciousness and commitment, education and security. People gain back dignity, confidence in the future and hope.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The Technology allows the rehabilitation of rangeland and highly degraded areas in a fast and natural way on a large scale. This can boost a longlasting effect and the shift of the whole ecosystem. The Technology confers drought resilience and reduces the effects of climate change. It allows the sequestration of CO2 and can contribute to achieve the Land Degradation Neutrality Goals.
The partecipatory approach is essential for the sustainability of the project. The local Communities improve their life quality, awareness, cohesion and resilience. The need for migration is reduced and people has the chance to stay in their Lands.
The sown tree and shrub species are mainly indigenous and locally adapted species. Each specie can follow it's own growing laws and adaptation strategies. Through the tillage process the technology offers the highest degree of efficiency in the first years from processing. Its effects last for a long time so it does not need to be repeated on the same site.
The VS does not use any water (except rain) in countries where water is rare and precious.
The use of a mechanized implement allows to rehabilitate very hard, degraded and abbandoned land on large areas with reduced population. As the Delfino3s can plow strongly degraded land, the local people often ask to work their worse land which they would never be able to use.

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?
Land that was unproductive and nobody claimed becomes productive: it can lead to misunderstandigs and conflicts. Land use and production exploitation rules must be cleared and accepted by all Subjects at the beginning of the project.
Good pasture attracts animals and herders from the nearby Region (also from far away and abroad). Rules must be clear.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
The investmentand running costs for the machinery are high and cannot be covered by single land users or small Communities. The projects must be financed by donors or founders. The Community can partecipate to some extent to cover the running costs.
The speed and effectiveness of the Delfino3s plow are its major advantages in the ecosystem rehabilitation process but can also be its major limitation. To make the best out of it, it is necessary to have a great availability of land (1.000-1.800ha) every year. A big organizational capacity is needed. The spreading "like wildfire" that has characterized the case study was possible by the presence on the territory of an NGO already active and rooted in the territory for many years and by perseverance, respect and competence of all involved subjects.
Since great extentions will be processed, a big organisation is needed for all connected activities (awareness raising, seed collection and stockage, training, logistics, etc), Must be well organized and should operate already before starting with plowing.
The professional level of the tractor drivers and the mechanics as well as the lack of a well-organized mechanical workshop and spares stock can lead to long interruptions of the work and high extra costs. Professional technical trainings and monitoring are very important. The organization of a well managed mechanical workshop and spares stock are essential. This can also be a great development opportunity for the Region.
The increased amount of fodder can induce the shepherds to increase the number of animals. An important work with the Communities is essential to achieve shared and sustainable management goals.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys

4

  • interviews with land users

30

  • interviews with SLM specialists/ experts

8

  • compilation from reports and other existing documentation

5

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Un "delfino" rinverdisce i deserti, Venanzio Vallerani, ISBN 978-88-95858-05-0

Available from where? Costs?

info@vallerani.com

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

Récupération des sols fortement dégradés à des fins sylvo-pastorales, CILSS 2009

URL:

http://www.vallerani.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Rapport-Reach-Cills-2009.pdf

Title/ description:

GIZ, Good practices in soil and water conservation, pag. 22 seg.

URL:

https://www.giz.de/fachexpertise/downloads/giz2012-en-soil-water-conservation.pdf

Title/ description:

Using Mechanized Water Harvesting System (The Vallerani System ) for Rehabilitation of Degraded ASALs in Kenya

URL:

http://www.vallerani.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Meshack-Muga-Paper-25-Final.pdf

Title/ description:

Report for the Sino-Italian cooperation project, SFA, China

URL:

http://www.vallerani.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Report_in_English-10.pdf

Title/ description:

Global guidelines for the restoration of degraded forests and landscapes in drylands FAO, pag. 104 seg.

URL:

http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5036e.pdf

Title/ description:

Improved rainwater harvesting for fodder shrub production and livestock grazing: the Vallerani micro-catchment system in the Badia of Jordan

URL:

http://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/en/c/1040697/

Title/ description:

Conedera, M., N. Bomio-Pacciorini, et al. 2010. Reconstitution des écosystèmes dégradés sahéliens. Bois et Forêts des Tropiques 304(2). Bois et Forêts des Tropiques 304(2). Bois et Forêts des Tropiques

URL:

http://www.vallerani.com/images/Reconstitution.pdf

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules