Marab - Water Harvesting Based Floodplain Agriculture [Jordan]

Marab in Arabic “المرب”

technologies_5770 - Jordan

Completeness: 90%

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:

Strohmeier Stefan

International Center of Agriculture Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)


SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:
Natural Resources Economist Social, Economy & Policy Research:

Dhehibi Boubaker

International Center of Agriculture Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)


Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
ICARDA Institutional Knowledge Management Initiative
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) - Lebanon

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:


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?



This technology conserves soil and water; it reduces surface water and sediment losses from dryland watersheds. The technology is located in downstream/lowland floodplains, and ideally, it is implemented in an integrated watershed approach. In the present case study, the ‘Marab’ is linked with two main upstream measures: Upland micro-water harvesting (Vallerani system) and gully/channel measures (gully plugs)

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The Marab is a local downstream water harvesting measure in an integrated watershed context, where up/midstream users and applied land management practices affect the Marab.
The technology diverts and spreads excess runoff over deep-soil flood plains. The technology comprises local gully-filling, grading/leveling of seed bed, and construction of a bund-and-spillway system creating several compartments for flood-irrigated agriculture.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology


Arid drylands of Jordan receive less than 200mm average annual rainfall. The specific site is located close by Al Majeddyeh village, around 30km south-east of Amman. The average annual rainfall at the site is around 130mm. The average temperature is above 18 degrees Celsius. The human environment is characterized by agro-pastoralists. These are farmers that live in permanent houses but transport their livestock to graze. As consequence of the natural environment and mis-management (e.g. overgrazing) desertification has been an increasingly problem, not only from an environmental perspective (e.g. carbon stocking; lack of water), but also from an socio-economic perspective, because desertification leads to reduced productive lands, consequently resulting in less income for the rural population.
Therefore, the aim of the technology is to achieve high-yield agriculture through flood/macro-catchment water harvesting in arid environments commonly unsuitable for field crop agriculture, creating beneficial impact for local land users. The high yield barley is fed to the livestock (goats and sheeps) of the local agro-pastoralists. Applied in an integrated watershed approach, it meets agricultural demands and motivates sustainable dryland ecosystem management in the uplands. The Marab-technology has a buffering effect on extreme runoff through water retention, for further use in downstream areas, including the trapping of relative fertile sediments from upstream. As the Marab increases yields, it also improves the livelihood of the local population.

The Marab-technology is a macro-catchment water harvesting technology. The Marab is located in the natural depression of the watershed (10 square kilometres), therefore most of the water from the watershed is captured here, instead of being spilled away. Combining this natural depression with the construction of bunds and specific soil leveling, leads to decreased run-off, thus highly increased water infiltration and soil moisture. Thereby, the biomass-production increased as well.
The watershed is characterized by degraded lands upstream (720 ha), where low yield and subsidized barley cultivation is practiced, and by gullies. In a limited part (12 ha) of the upstream area, Vallerani micro-catchments are implemented as a pilot-plot. This might seem contradicting since upstream micro-catchment water harvesting decreases the water in the Marab downstream. However, the Vallerani micro-catchments also have beneficial impacts on the watershed and the Marab, such as flattening peak water flows, reducing erosion and providing fodder. The reduction in water run-off for the Marab as consequence of the Vallerani structures is not significant, due to the small size of the pilot area. But the relations between upstream and downstream should be taken into account.

Upstream watershed measures to buffer and/or avoid extreme runoff events (extreme downstream flooding) in the Marab such as micro-catchment water harvesting structures (Vallerani tractor plow system) and the out-planting of native shrub seedlings, as well as the stabilization of erosive gully systems through gully plugging and revegetation of side banks are advised to be taken before implementing the Marab technology downstream, as they safeguard and protect the Marab. But they are not further into account in this documentation.
Establishment of the downstream Marab system includes:
•Local filling of downstream gull(system) with deep soil
•Leveling/grading of flood plains
•Construction of earth bunds
•Construction of the spillways (stone made)
• Seedbed preparation for planting annual crop such as barley

Marab agricultural production is high and stable. It can reach around 5-6 t ha-1 of barley, compared with the low and strongly varying yields of around 0.05-0.30 t ha-1 in traditionally, without macro water harvesting, cultivated barley. Marab barley produces grains (for fodder and reseeding purposes) and requires local inputs, such as fertilizer. The Marab mitigates downstream flooding and loss of sediments from the watershed. Local farmers applying the Marab technology are very satisfied, because of the extremely increased yield as consequence of the technology. However, as water is captured in the watershed, tensions may arise between the downstream (Marab) users and the upstream users.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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



Region/ State/ Province:

Al Jiza District

Further specification of location:

Al Majeddyeh Village

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area
Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?


2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:


2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • during experiments/ research
  • through projects/ external interventions

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

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

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:


Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):
  • Agro-pastoralism (incl. integrated crop-livestock)



  • Annual cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - barley
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Is intercropping practiced?


Is crop rotation practiced?


Grazing land

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:
  • Semi-nomadic pastoralism
Intensive grazing/ fodder production:
  • Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing
Animal type:
  • goats
  • sheep
Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?


3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?
  • No (Continue with question 3.4)

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • rainfed

The Marab facilitates uniform distribution of excess rainwater obtained from the upland (partly Vallerani micro-catchments) and the water is conveyed through rehabilitated gullies to the Marab. (Some) Micro catchments and rehabilitated gullies are essential to avoid damaging water peaks, harming the Marab-structures. The Marab is rainfed and naturally flood irrigated.

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • improved ground/ vegetation cover
  • water harvesting
  • water diversion and drainage

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A3: Soil surface treatment
  • A4: Subsurface treatment
structural measures

structural measures

  • S2: Bunds, banks
  • S3: Graded ditches, channels, waterways

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
physical soil deterioration

physical soil deterioration

  • Pk: slaking and crusting
biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
  • Bq: quantity/ biomass decline
water degradation

water degradation

  • Ha: aridification

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

Retaining surface runoff and locally infiltrating water through bunds increase soil moisture hence agricultural yield increases (e.g. biomass, vegetation cover) , soil crusting decreases (in some selected ponding areas it might increase) - and because of trapping top-soil sediments and residues from the uplands, soil fertility increases likewise.

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The overall Marab (reshaped flood plain) area is 10 hectares. The natural flood plain was leveled up to the sides; the natural slope in flow direction ranges between 0.1 and 1.5% (D). The later stone bund construction (soil relocation) and siltation/erosion processes over time develop a slight step-terraced bund compartment system, with the single compartments having much smaller slope than the overall Marab. At the sides, the levelled area slightly increases towards the natural terrain (natural terrain at the sides is around 0.1 to 0.3m higher compared with the leveled Marab). This avoids side outflow of water during design storms (*). Bund structures, along the contour, are built with a loader up to around 0.7 to 1.0m height and around 2.0 – 3.0m bottom width. The bunds are built with compaction through the loader. Interspace between the bunds is between 10-50 meters (C), depending on the local slope in the flow direction, having around 0.1 to 0.3m soil surface elevation difference between the bunds. Stone made design-spillways (A) are being constructed around the middle of each bund, with certain position change between the bund in downstream direction. Thus, spillways do not perfectly align with respect to the bund, but create a meandering flow around the center. The stone-protected design-spillways are designed to safely route at least the expected 2-5 year return period flood event. The Marab plain is not perfectly even, especially at the sides, to avoid water flowing around the bunds during design storms. However, the Marab-technology is also designed to cope with more extreme events, a storm of 5-10 return period, without significant damages. Therefore, there are emergency-spillways (**) implemented at the sides of each bund (B). These emergency-spillways allow excess water to flow out sideways rather than flow over the bund which would damage the structures. Note:
Based on above considerations and calculations bund spillway lengths reach 50-60m in the specific watershed.

* A design storm is a rainfall event that results in a flood event as water accumulates throughout the watershed. The Marab is designed to harvest the water optimally by (design) spill ways that keep the water in the Marab. A design storm relates to a certain return period. In general a longer return period (i.e. less frequent) accounts for a more intense event hence a more severe flooding event.
** An emergency spill way is a structure that is designed to discharge excess water coming from storms more extreme than the design storm (i.e. with less frequent storms). In practice this means that the Marab is protected from excess water.


Joren Verbist (Extracted from Google Earth Pro on Jan 7th 2019)



Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The cross-section shows the dimensions. Downstream of a bund the width is 70 centimeter. The foundation is 20 centimeter high. The upstream width is 30 centimeter. The total width of the bund varies between 2.2 meter and 2.5 meter.


Stefan Strohmeier



4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

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

10 ha

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


4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Implement upstream watershed rehabilitation measure (e.g. Upstream Vallerani micro water harvesting) Prior of Marab-Technology construction
2. Implement gully rehabilitation measure (e.g. Midstream gully rehabilitation) Prior of Marab-Technology construction
3. Marab site selection (flood plain): topographic assessment (slope, soil depth, etc.) and consideration of watershed hydrology (e.g. for bund and spillway design) Before the rainy season
4. Grading/levelling of natural flood plain incl. gully fill (with soil material) season (Aug. – Nov.)
5. Implement bund structures (based on step 4) season (Aug. – Nov.)
6. Construct stone made design and emergence spillways (based on step 5) season (Aug. – Nov.)
7. Preparation of compartmentalized agricultural fields (bund interspaces) for field crop agriculture season (Aug. – Nov.)

The upstream measures as the Vallerani System and gully rehabilitation are strongly recommended but are not taken into account as costs in this documentation. Because this documentation focuses specifically on the Marab-technology.

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 Local Workers person-days 50.0 35.0 1750.0
Labour Land Survey person-days 6.0 35.0 210.0
Labour Engineer (+assistance) person-days 15.0 50.0 750.0
Labour Drivers of heavy machinery person-days 12.0 35.0 420.0
Equipment Grader machine-days 3.0 250.0 750.0
Equipment Loader machine-days 10.0 250.0 2500.0
Equipment Deep Plow machine-days 3.0 200.0 600.0
Equipment Tractor (to pull the shallow and deep plow) machine-days 5.0 200.0 1000.0
Equipment Shallow Plow machine-days 2.0 200.0 400.0
Equipment Water Tank Truck Tank 1.0 50.0 50.0
Equipment Small Equipment (Shovel, pickaxe, buckets) Equipment 1.0 200.0 200.0
Construction material Stones Kubic Metre 200.0 10.0 2000.0
Other Transportation of heavy machinery 1.0 2000.0 2000.0
Other Security 1.0 300.0 300.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 12930.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 12930.0
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

ICARDA and National Agricultural Research Centre (NARC)


These costs are for establishment (so one-time) and are for the total Marab-technology i.e. 10 ha.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Maintaining the structures based on observations and possible damages after the rainy season, so no clear maintenance plans Before the rainy season (Oct. – Nov.)/upon observation

Excludes annual farming costs (e.g. seedbed preparation)

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 Engineer person days per year 2.0 50.0 100.0 100.0
Labour Worker person days per year 6.0 35.0 210.0 100.0
Equipment Loader machine days per year 1.0 250.0 250.0 100.0
Construction material Stones Kubic Metre 10.0 10.0 100.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 660.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 660.0

The costs of practicing agriculture (e.g. cost of seeds and fertilizer) are not taken into account, since these costs were also made before the implementation of this technology.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The special and heavy machinery affect the cost significantly, since these were not available in the area. The implementation of the technology is labour intensive, therefore labour costs are significant as well. However, these costs are initially, so these specific costs are almost zero after establishment. In addition, all the maintenance is payed for by the land users. So, only the establishment was payed for by external parties.

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:


Specifications/ comments on rainfall:

In the specific site/dry areas of Jordan rainy season usually ranges from November until April
Queen Alia International Airport long-time avergae annual rainfall is around 150 mm (around 10km west of the site)
At the site a rainfall tipping bucket has been installed in 2016.

Indicate the name of the reference meteorological station considered:

Queen Alia International Airport

Agro-climatic zone
  • arid

The maximum temperature usually occurres in August.
The average daily maximum temperature is 25.01 °C.
The average daily minimum temperature is 8.5 °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%)
  • 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:
  • convex situations
Comments and further specifications on topography:

The Marab itself is rather concave (depression shape) / natural depression. However, the bund structures are convex, spreading water over the field.

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)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • low (<1%)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

> 50 m

Availability of surface water:

poor/ none

Water quality (untreated):


Water quality refers to:

surface water

Is water salinity a problem?


Is flooding of the area occurring?




5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • low
Habitat diversity:
  • low

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Sedentary or nomadic:
  • Semi-nomadic
Market orientation of production system:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
  • less than 10% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • poor
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
  • mechanized/ motorized
  • men
Age of land users:
  • youth
  • middle-aged
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

The actual land users are often poor Jordanians or Syrian refugees. However, the owners of the livestock are relatively rich. The landowners are responsible for the maintenance of the intervention.

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
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • medium-scale


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

Land ownership:
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • leased
  • individual
  • NA
Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?


5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
  • 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


crop production

Comments/ specify:

The crops produced are used as fodder

fodder production

Quantity before SLM:


Quantity after SLM:


Comments/ specify:

The production of the fodder is increased as the barley yield is mostly used to feed animals and also the stubble is grazed.

fodder quality

Comments/ specify:

The barley is fed to the livestock

production area

Comments/ specify:

Due to the bunds (but very limited and inevitable)

land management

Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

Comments/ specify:

Expenses are slightly increased due to possible maintenance of the Marab. However, the increased yield justifies this.

farm income



Comments/ specify:

Due to possible maintenance

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency


SLM/ land degradation knowledge

Comments/ specify:

During the construction, local community were hired as workers, this has significantly boosted their knowlegde about SLM.

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

harvesting/ collection of water


surface runoff


excess water drainage


groundwater table/ aquifer


soil moisture


soil cover


soil loss


soil accumulation


soil crusting/ sealing


soil organic matter/ below ground C

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Vegetation cover


biomass/ above ground C

Climate and disaster risk reduction

flood impacts


drought impacts


6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

downstream flooding

Comments/ specify:

Reduced downstream flooding is desired

downstream siltation

Comments/ specify:

Reduced downstream siltation is desired

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 rainfall decrease well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm very well
Hydrological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
flash flood very well

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:


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


Long-term returns:

very positive


The initial investment is quite large. Therefore, the short term returns is classified as slightly negative. After some seasons with good (stable) crop yield the return of investment is positive. Long term benefits are classified positively.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • 1-10%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

These are some farmers that live near the Marab. They try to copy the Marab in their fields.

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 91-100%

The local farmers like the technology and acknowledge its positive impacts. They would like to have a Marab themselves (even if their locally owned lands are not suitable in many cases). Local agro-pastoralists copy and apply parts of the technology (especially the bund
system). However, it strongly recommended that implementing a Marab-technology is done as a community-based project/intervention; the Marab technology should be part of an integrated watershed management plan, located at the most suitable location for the entire community.

6.6 Adaptation

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


If yes, indicate to which changing conditions it was adapted:
  • climatic change/ extremes
Specify adaptation of the Technology (design, material/ species, etc.):

The spillway design can be adapted to variable surface runoff occurrence (affected by climate change).

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The farmers highly appreciate the improved economic situation as consequence of the increased yield.
A strength of the Marab technology is that water is harvested and minimally spilled away, preventing top-soil erosion and accumulating soil organic matter consequently preserving soil fertility.
The crop produces grains: can be (partially) used for re-seeding in the coming seasons; economic gain + increase resilience.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Economic improvement through targeted agricultural interventions in the most suitable location(s) of a watershed. This aims at decreasing the pressure on the fragile dry land ecosystem. The locally increased yield raises awareness on non-sufficient field crop agriculture in uplands (commonly achieved) and might increase the willingness for more nature-based sustainable land management measures in the less fertile and runoff generating (more vulnerable uplands) parts of the watershed. Therefore, the Marab technology could be a starting point for a watershed rehabilitation initiative.
The Marab technology creates an opportunity for multiple crop introduction (due to natural flood irrigation) – aside from barley monoculture (agro-diversity).
Increased water infiltration conserves water and might lead to deep percolation (groundwater recharge).

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?
The Marab depends on upstream water users; can lead to increased tensions Agreement among the community - conducting contacts/contracts among upstream and downstream farmers. Joint watershed management and benefit share could be mediate these tension. And might even lead to watershed rehabilitation.
High initial investment and partially high maintenance costs (including machinery) Once the implementation is linked with larger environmental benefits – communities might receive funds from the government or international donors.
Loss of cultivation area where the bunds are placed Unavoidable. However, the gain of interspaces exceeds these losses several times.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Tensions among multiple actors in the watershed (selection of Marab area) Develop institutions that could avoid these tensions by establishing agreements, contracts, rules, or regulations.
Heavy machinery in a vulnerable ecosystems – can induce other requests/use by locals (improper use) Targeted policies in place & enforcements
Increasing wealth inequality between farmers and/or communities. Creation of institutions, which assure fair distribution. This would benefit the whole watershed.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys
  • interviews with land users
  • interviews with SLM specialists/ experts
  • compilation from reports and other existing documentation
When were the data compiled (in the field)?


7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Strohmeier, S. (2017). Dimensioning of Marab in Majidyya.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Strohmeier, S. (2017). Watershed Restoration in Baia Areas of Jordan Technology Packages for Controlling and Monitoring Gully Erosion.

Available from where? Costs?

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Mira Haddad, Stefan Strohmeier. (12/12/2017). Treated upland areas map. Jordan: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).

Available from where? Costs?

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Stefan Strohmeier, Mira Haddad, Ismail Shukri. (8/11/2018). Marab - water harvesting based agriculture.

Available from where? Costs?

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Boubaker Dhehibi, Mira Haddad, Stefan Strohmeier, Masnat El-Hiary. (24/7/2020). Enhancing a Traditional Water Harvesting Technique in Jordan’s Agro-pastoral Farming System. Lebanon: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).

Available from where? Costs?

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:



Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all