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)

Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling out Sustainable Land Management (GEF-FAO / DS-SLM)

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

Royaume du Maroc, Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte Contre la Désertification (Royaume du Maroc) - 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

1.4 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

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Interdiction d'accès aux animaux (pâturage direct et indirect) pour assurer la dynamique progressive de la végétation et son développement.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

La mise en défens est instauré après l'incendie de forêt de 2011.
En plus de la l'interdiction des usages habituels de la population locale (paturage, ramassage du bois mort, etc) et tous les sujets incendiés sont recépés.
Avec uniquement l'exclusion des usages habituels et le respect de la mise en défens on attend une reprise de la végétation spontannée naturellement.
La restriction au parcours et autres activités humaines de prélèvement de produit est une mesure qui ne peut être efficace que grace à l'adhésion des usagers pour le respect de la mis en défens. Dans ce cas, les usagers se sont organisés en association et bénéficient de la compensation à raison de 350 dh/an/ha en application de la réglementation relative à la suspension des droits d'usages mise au point depuis 2002.
Après 5 à 6 ans de mise en défens, on remarque bien que la mise en défens a donné des résultats très satisfaisants en matère de réhabilitation du couvert arboré et du développement des espèces locales.

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

Indicate year of implementation:

2012

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Par le biais de projet initié par le département des Eaux et Forêts.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
• preserve/ improve biodiversity

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Silvo-pastoralism

Comments:

Toute utilisation est suspendue actuellement.

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)

Comments:

- Pâturages sur des prairies naturelles ou semi-naturelles, prairies arborées/ arbustives (savanes) ou boisement ouvert pour l’élevage ou la faune sauvage.
- Forêts composées principalement d’arbres indigènes non plantés par l’homme.

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

• natural and semi-natural forest management
• pastoralism and grazing land management
• improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• USD

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

10.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Recepage et nettoiement des arbres et arbustes incendiés	Après incendie 2012
2.	Sensibilisation des usagers	2012
3.	Mise au point de contrat de compensation et engagement des usagers au respect de la mise en défens	2013

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	Recepage	ha	750.0	1000.0	750000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					750000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					75000.0

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

Etat / Service des Eaux et Forêts

Comments:

Le respect et le gardiennage des mises en défens est composé à raison de 350 dirhams/ha/an (35 USD). La main d'oeuvre est payée de ce montant de la compensation.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Montant de la compensation annuelle	Novembre

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
Other	Compensation mise en défens	ha	750.0	35.0	26250.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					26250.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					2625.0

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

Etat

Comments:

Les usagers contribuent en nature par le gardiennage assuré spontannement par tous les membres.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

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

• suspendu

Water use rights:

• individual

Comments:

Droit d'utilisation suspendu par la mise en défens.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

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?
seasonal temperature	spring	decrease	moderately
annual rainfall		decrease	not well
seasonal rainfall		decrease	moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well
forest fire	moderately

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

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

• 51-90%

Comments:

La technologie est adoptée par le département des forêts. L'application est sous la responsabilité des usagers pour recevoir en contre partie la compensation en vigueur.

6.6 Adaptation

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

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Facilite la reconstitution des forêts
Réhabilitation des espèces végétales et animales

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Un moyen efficace pour la réhabilitation des ecosystèmes présentant un potentiel écologique important
Cette technologie engage moins de frais pour la réhabilitation des écosystèmes forestiers

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?
Superficie importante est mise en défens	Réhabilitation progressive
Taux faible de la compensation.	Augmentation du taux de la compensation

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Opposition de certains usagers	Nécessité d'engager la responsabilité des usagers dans ce type d'action

7.1 Methods/ sources of information