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)

ICARDA Institutional Knowledge Management Initiative

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Gradoni orchard terraces are intermittent strips of contour-based structures separated by catchments of about 10 metres. They are designed to capture and hold rainwater, reduce erosion, and improve conditions for the cultivation (in this case) of almond and pistachio trees, thereby enhancing land productivity and climate resilience in dryland areas.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Qashqadaryo Province in southern Uzbekistan experiences a hot, dry summer and a mild winter. Combined with unsustainable land management practices, climatic stresses have exacerbated land degradation and made local livelihoods increasingly vulnerable.
As part of the Food Systems, Land Use and Restoration (FOLUR) project, the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) designed and tested rainwater harvesting (RWH) structures to combat land degradation and enhance rural livelihoods. These RWH structures support vegetation growth, reduce surface runoff, prevent erosion, and restore soil health—thereby reversing degradation and improving agricultural productivity.
The intervention site, covering approximately 1.6 hectares, is characterized by shallow clay soils (5–25 cm deep).
Gradoni orchard terraces (“intermittent terraces” or “step terraces”) were used. These small contour-based earth structures are separated by catchments of about 10 metres. They are designed to capture and hold rainwater, reduce erosion, and improve conditions for the cultivation – in this case of almond and pistachio.
Two variations were implemented depending on the slope gradient: one with stone-reinforced risers on steep slopes (20–25%), and the other with earth risers on moderate slopes (12–19%). The terraces are sited about 10 meters apart on contour lines, and the terrace beds are only 1-1.5 metres wide and the risers 0.25-0.5 metres high. Along each back-sloping terrace bed, 5 metres spacing between trees was considered optimal.
Following site assessment, data collection, and detailed design calculations, implementation commenced. Although a grader was initially preferred for terrace construction, an older local tractor was used due to its better manoeuvrability on the steep terrain. The tractor ploughed the land using a two-mouldboard plough, after which manual labour, guided by technical experts, shaped the terraces. To accommodate natural contour variability, the terraces were not continuous – but gaps were left between them.
During a week of implementation, 25 Gradoni terraces were constructed, of which eight were stone-reinforced. Around 340 almond and pistachio trees were planted. Two workers had spent two days marking contour lines, while ten others worked for four days to finalize the terraces after the tractor had loosened the soil. The estimated lifespan of the terraces is around 20 years without maintenance, with the stone-reinforced ones expected to last even longer.
Land users expressed optimism about the prospect of improved incomes from almond and pistachio yields, especially considering the previously low or non-existent production due to severe land degradation and lack of water.
Maintenance requirements are expected to be minimal. Experts highlighted the terraces' role in capturing and retaining rainwater, which supports vegetation regeneration and contributes significantly to reversing and preventing further land degradation. By improving water availability, the intervention strengthens the community’s ability to withstand droughts, thereby securing income in the face of climate variability. The introduction of pistachio and almond cultivation provides a new and valuable source of income for local land users. These tree crops are well-suited to the arid environment and are inherently drought-resilient, making them an ideal choice for sustaining agricultural productivity under increasingly dry conditions.

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:

2024

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

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

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

No

Comments:

There are ideas to include some crop production/cultivation between the terraces. To enhance production as well as soil conservation.

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)

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

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• cross-slope measure
• water harvesting

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:

• reduce 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

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Start of field activities: Site setup, contour line marking by 2 workers	20 September
2.	Continuation of contour marking	21 September
3.	Tractor plowing using a chain tractor with 2-moldboard plow	22 September
4.	Manual terrace formation by 10 laborers; shaping and adjusting terraces	23–26 September
5.	Tree planting – approximately 340 pistachio and almond trees planted	25–26 September

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	Contour marking	Person-days	4.0
Labour	Terrace shaping	Person-days	40.0
Labour	Stone reinforcement	Person-days	8.0
Labour	Tree planting	Person-days	8.0
Labour	Supervision	Person-days	5.0
Equipment	Tractor + plough/grader	Machine-Days	2.0
Plant material	Seedlings	Number	340.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Manure	kg	1350.0
Construction material	Stones	m3	120.0
Other	total cost		1.0	3200.0	3200.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					3200.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					3200.0

If you are unable to break down the costs in the table above, give an estimation of the total costs of establishing the Technology:

3300.0

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

Project

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Inspections and incidental repairs	Throughout year

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	Inspection and incidental repairs	person-days	2.0			100.0

Comments:

It is not quantified and evidenced but 10-25% of establishment is typically considered the yearly cost of maintenance.

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?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

The farmer using the land is an employee at the forestry department.

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
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• individual

• Water not available

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Climate and disaster risk reduction

Specify assessment of on-site impacts (measurements):

Expert judgement

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

Expert judgement

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	moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
flash flood	well

Comments:

Expert judgement

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)?

Comments:

Expectations

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

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

• 0-10%

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
Gradoni terraces provide a stable planting bed ideal for perennial, drought-resistant tree crops like pistachio and almond. These trees not only stabilize the soil further but also offer long-term income opportunities, enhancing both ecological resilience and rural livelihoods.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
By breaking the slope into small, level steps, Gradoni terraces significantly reduce the velocity of surface runoff. This minimizes soil erosion and helps restore degraded lands, especially on sloping terrain, making previously unproductive land usable again.
Gradoni terraces capture and slow down rainwater runoff, allowing it to infiltrate into the soil rather than flow away. This increases soil moisture availability, which is especially critical in arid and semi-arid environments, supporting better plant growth and reducing drought vulnerability.

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 construction of terraces—especially on steep slopes with stone reinforcement—can require significant manual labor and materials upfront.	Expand over time

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
If terraces are not properly aligned with contour lines, water may concentrate and cause erosion or structural failure.	Introduce intentional breaks in the terrace line, as done in this project, to relieve pressure where alignment may be imperfect.
The construction of terraces—especially on steep slopes with stone reinforcement—can require significant manual labor and materials upfront.	Mobilize community participation and use local labor to reduce costs.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Oweis, T. and Haddad, M. 2023. Rainwater Harvesting Design Manual: Micro-catchment Systems for Drylands Agriculture. Lebanon, Beirut: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).

URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/10568/169777

Title/ description:

Sheng, T. C. (1989). Soil conservation for small farmers in the humid tropics (FAO Soils Bulletin). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

URL:

https://ia601300.us.archive.org/6/items/bub_gb_uLX80osg3rUC/bub_gb_uLX80osg3rUC.pdf

Title/ description:

Critchley, W. & Siegert, K., (1991). Water Harvesting: A Manual for the Design and Construction of Water Harvesting Schemes for Plant Production. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation, Rome

URL:

https://www.fao.org/3/U3160E/U3160E00.htm