1.2 Coordonnées des personnes-ressources et des institutions impliquées dans l'évaluation et la documentation de la Technologie

Nom du projet qui a facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de la Technologie (si pertinent)

Book project: where the land is greener - Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide (where the land is greener)

Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de la Technologie (si pertinent)

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development) - Ethiopie

1.3 Conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées

Quand les données ont-elles été compilées (sur le terrain)?

01/07/2003

Le compilateur et la(les) personne(s) ressource(s) acceptent les conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées:

Oui

1.4 Déclaration sur la durabilité de la Technologie décrite

Est-ce que la Technologie décrite ici pose problème par rapport à la dégradation des terres, de telle sorte qu'elle ne peut pas être déclarée comme étant une technologie de gestion durable des terres?

Non

1.5 Référence au(x) questionnaire(s) sur les Approches de GDT

2.1 Courte description de la Technologie

Définition de la Technologie:

Enclosing and protecting an area of degraded land from human use and animal interference, to permit natural rehabilitation, enhanced by additional vegetative and structural conservation measures.

2.2 Description détaillée de la Technologie

Description:

Area closure involves the protection and resting of severely degraded land to restore its productive capacity. There are two major types of area enclosures practised in Ethiopia: (1) the most common type involves closing of an area from livestock and people so that natural regeneration of the vegetation can take place; (2) the second option comprises closing off degraded land while simultaneously implementing additional measures such as planting of seedlings, mulching and establishing water harvesting structures to enhance and speed up the regeneration process. The focus of this case study is on this second type.

The selection of measures chosen for rehabilitation depends mainly on the land use type, and to a lesser extent on climate, topography and soil type. Degraded croplands with individual land use rights are normally treated with additional structural measures to retain soil moisture and trap sediment, and with agronomic measures to restore soil fertility. Open access grazing lands are closed for natural regeneration while partly treated with additional measures, and open access woodlands are simply closed. In the case study area 60% of the enclosed area is under treatment with additional conservation measures and 40% is under natural regeneration. First, the area to be closed is demarcated and protected with fencing, usually live fences, and a site guard may be assigned to further ensure protection. Structural measures such as micro-basins, trenches, and bunds that enhance water infiltration and soil moisture may be constructed to increase survival rate of vegetative material planted. Hillside terraces, spaced at a 1 m vertical interval with a width of 1 m are constructed on steep slopes (exceeding 20%). Nitrogen-fixing and multipurpose shrubs/trees (for fodder, fuel) such as Acacia saligna, Sesbania sesban, Leucaena leucocephala as well as local grass species such as napier (Pennisetum purpureum) and rhodes (Chloris gayana) are planted as additional measures for conservation.

The maintenance of area enclosures involves activities such as replanting, maintaining of fences, pruning of trees and weeding. After one year, cut-and-carry of grass for stall-feeding can be partly practiced - which is of economic benefit to the farmers. Rehabilitation normally takes about 7-10 years depending on the level of degradation and intensity of management. Land use is limited to selective cutting of trees, collection of dead wood and cut-and-carry of grass for livestock fodder. On individually owned enclosures land users start cutting trees after three years (for eucalyptus) and after 7–8 years (for other trees), while on communal land farmers are allowed to collect dead wood after 3-–4 years, and the community decides about the use of trees.

2.3 Photos de la Technologie

2.5 Pays/ région/ lieux où la Technologie a été appliquée et qui sont couverts par cette évaluation

2.7 Introduction de la Technologie

Spécifiez comment la Technologie a été introduite: :

• par le biais de projets/ d'interventions extérieures

3.1 Principal(aux) objectif(s) de la Technologie

• améliorer la production
• réduire, prévenir, restaurer les terres dégradées
• préserver l'écosystème

3.2 Type(s) actuel(s) d'utilisation des terres, là où la Technologie est appliquée

Commentaires:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Over 30% of the land in the study area is degraded, resulting in low crop yields and poor livestock production. Severe water erosion is the main cause of land degradation on all slopes, followed by fertility depletion due to intensive cultivation practices and overgrazing. Serious gully formation and a high sediment load in the Bilate River threaten Lake Abaya. Communal grazing lands, woodlands with open access, and cultivated lands on steep slopes without conservation measures are particularly affected. By tradition, land users in rural Ethiopia can own as many livestock as they wish, which encourages overstocking.

Ranching: (before SWC)

Other grazingland: mixed silvo-pastoral (after SWC): cut-and-carry, trees

3.3 Informations complémentaires sur l'utilisation des terres

Approvisionnement en eau des terres sur lesquelles est appliquée la Technologie:

• pluvial

Précisez:

Longest growing period in days: 120 Longest growing period from month to month: Jun - Sep

3.4 Groupe de GDT auquel appartient la Technologie

• fermeture de zones (arrêt de tout usage, appui à la réhabilitation)
• mesures en travers de la pente

3.5 Diffusion de la Technologie

Commentaires:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 20 m2.

3.6 Mesures de GDT constituant la Technologie

3.7 Principaux types de dégradation des terres traités par la Technologie

Commentaires:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion, Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Wo: offsite degradation effects, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline

3.8 Prévention, réduction de la dégradation ou réhabilitation des terres dégradées

Spécifiez l'objectif de la Technologie au regard de la dégradation des terres:

• restaurer/ réhabiliter des terres sévèrement dégradées

4.1 Dessin technique de la Technologie

4.2 Spécification/ explications techniques du dessin technique

Rehabilitation of degraded land based on enclosure with live fence. Natural regeneration of vegetative cover is supported by water harvesting structures and planting of nitrogen-fixing/multipurpose shrubs and trees as well as local grass species. On steeper slopes hillside terraces may be established.

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: improvement of ground cover, increase of infiltration, control of dispersed runoff, control of concentrated runoff, increase in soil fertility

Secondary technical functions: increase / maintain water stored in soil, less sediment deportation

Mulching
Material/ species: tree leaves/grass

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs

Vegetative measure: oversowing grasses
Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Trees/ shrubs species: Acacia saligna, Sesbania sesban, Leucaena leucocephala, Eucalyptus spp., Grevillea robusta

Grass species: nepier (Pennisetum purpureum), rhodes (Chloris gayana)

Structural measure: micro-basins (opt.)

Structural measure: terraces (opt.)

Structural measure: bunds (opt.)

Other type of management: land use change, enclosure,, cut-and-carry

4.4 Activités de mise en place/ d'établissement

	Activité	Type de mesures	Calendrier
1.	Planting of trees (Eucalyptus spp., Grevillea robusta) as well as	Végétale	(early rainy season).
2.	Oversowing/interplanting with local grass species: napier grass	Végétale	(early rainy season).
3.	Marking the boundary and establishment of live fences: digging pits	Structurel	early rainy season (before June).
4.	Construction of structural measures such as micro- basins, trenches, bunds or hillside terraces.	Structurel	before rains

4.5 Coûts et intrants nécessaires à la mise en place

	Spécifiez les intrants	Unité	Quantité	Coûts par unité	Coût total par intrant	% du coût supporté par les exploitants des terres
Main d'œuvre	Labour	ha	1,0	175,0	175,0	50,0
Equipements	Tools	ha	1,0	25,0	25,0	100,0
Matériel végétal	Seeds	ha	1,0	40,0	40,0
Matériel végétal	Seedlings	ha	1,0	150,0	150,0
Matériaux de construction	Stone	ha	1,0
Matériaux de construction	Wood	ha	1,0
Autre	site guard (kg grain/ha/year)	ha	1,0	1,0	1,0	100,0
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie					391,0

Commentaires:

Duration of establishment phase: 2 month(s)

4.6 Activités d'entretien/ récurrentes

	Activité	Type de mesures	Calendrier/ fréquence
1.	Mulching with tree leaves/grass around newly planted trees, before	Agronomique	before rains / initial establishment
2.	Replanting/gapping up live fence and trees during rains in the early	Végétale	during rains /
3.	Harvesting grass	Végétale	during rainy season. /
4.	Pruning of trees	Végétale	in the dry season. /
5.	Weeding	Végétale	after rains. /
6.	Repairing breaks in structures	Structurel	before rains./

4.7 Coûts et intrants nécessaires aux activités d'entretien/ récurrentes (par an)

	Spécifiez les intrants	Unité	Quantité	Coûts par unité	Coût total par intrant	% du coût supporté par les exploitants des terres
Main d'œuvre	Labour	ha	1,0	35,0	35,0	100,0
Equipements	Tools	ha	1,0	5,0	5,0	100,0
Matériel végétal	Seeds	ha	1,0	10,0	10,0
Matériel végétal	Seedlings	ha	1,0	40,0	40,0
Autre	site guard (kg grain/ha/year)	ha	1,0	1,0	1,0	100,0
Coût total d'entretien de la Technologie					91,0

Commentaires:

Labour for establishment activities: 250 person days per ha for structural measures and planting of trees, plus guarding. Labour for maintenance: 50 person days for replanting/weeding. A common daily wage is US$ 0.70 (= 6 Ethiopian Birr), however in this case the site guards were given 3 kg of grains per ha per year. They can control over 200 ha.

5.1 Climat

5.2 Topographie

Commentaires et précisions supplémentaires sur la topographie:

Altitudinal zone: Also 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l. (ranked 2) and 2001-2500 m a.s.l. (ranked 3)
Slopes on average: Also hilly (ranked 2) and moderate (ranked 3)

5.3 Sols

Si disponible, joignez une description complète du sol ou précisez les informations disponibles, par ex., type de sol, pH/ acidité du sol, capacité d'échange cationique, azote, salinité, etc.

Soil depth on average: Also moderately deep (ranked 2) and deep (ranked 3)
Soil fertility: Low
Topsoil organic matter: Also medium and high (both ranked 2)
Soil drainage/infiltration: Good
Soil water storage capacity: Very high

5.6 Caractéristiques des exploitants des terres appliquant la Technologie

Indiquez toute autre caractéristique pertinente des exploitants des terres:

Off-farm income specification: from petty trade, weaving, etc

5.7 Superficie moyenne des terres détenues ou louées par les exploitants appliquant la Technologie

5.8 Propriété foncière, droits d’utilisation des terres et de l'eau

Propriété foncière:

• état

Droits d’utilisation des terres:

• accès libre (non organisé)
• individuel

6.1 Impacts sur site que la Technologie a montrés

Impacts socio-économiques

Production

Revenus et coûts

Impacts socioculturels

Impacts écologiques

Cycle de l'eau/ ruissellement

Sols

Autres impacts écologiques

6.2 Impacts hors site que la Technologie a montrés

6.4 Analyse coûts-bénéfices

Quels sont les bénéfices comparativement aux coûts de mise en place (du point de vue des exploitants des terres)?

Quels sont les bénéfices comparativement aux coûts d'entretien récurrents (du point de vue des exploitants des terres)?

6.5 Adoption de la Technologie

Parmi tous ceux qui ont adopté la Technologie, combien d'entre eux l'ont fait spontanément, à savoir sans recevoir aucune incitation matérielle ou aucun paiement?

• 90-100%

Commentaires:

300 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

90% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Adoption rate has considerably increased owing to improved ownership feeling and immense benefits obtained through the practice. However, if labour-intensive structural measures are required people rely on food-for-work incentives.

6.7 Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités de la Technologie

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Reduction of on-site and off-site land degradation, reclamation of degraded non-productive land (regenerating fertility) How can they be sustained / enhanced? Strengthen maintenance and protection to increase biomass production of enclosure.
Fodder shortage is reduced through cut-and-carry of grass in enclosures (after 1 year) How can they be sustained / enhanced? Introduce more productive and nutritious grass/legume species.
Collection of dead wood from enclosures (after 3–4 years) mitigates fuelwood shortage How can they be sustained / enhanced? Introduce alternative fast growing multi-purpose tree species such as Grevillea robusta (fodder for smallstock in very dry periods).
Cutting wood for construction of houses and wooden farm implements (after 7–8 years) How can they be sustained / enhanced? Continue planting of multipurpose trees.
Increased honey production through increased bee activity in enclosures Emerge of springs, which have disappeared due to deforestation/land degradation Income generation: farmers sell grass/wood collected from area enclosures; they make profit despite seven years enclosure How can they be sustained / enhanced? Improve beehives, ‘bee feed’ (bee-friendly plants), and access to market. Maintain proper ground cover to improve infiltration and percolation of rainwater. Better management of planted grass, making of hay, improve market systems.
Emergence of springs, which have disappeared due to deforestation/land degradation -> Maintain proper ground cover to improve infiltration and percolation of rainwater. - Income generation: farmers sell grass/wood collected from area enclosures; they make profit despite seven years enclosure -> Better management of planted grass, making of hay, improve market systems. Editors’ comments: Protecting degraded land against grazing is a common practice worldwide. In Ethiopia it is the second most important SWC practice after structural conservation measures. About 1.2 million hectares of degraded lands have been closed for rehabilitation in Ethiopia during the past three decades. As this case study shows, results are encouraging both in terms of effective protection and enhanced production. Land use rights: open access on woodlands and grazing lands (communal land use rights), individual on cropland

6.8 Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques de la Technologie et moyens de les surmonter

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
On highly eroded areas and in areas with low rainfall the survival rate of trees and shrubs is low and as a result the benefits only come after a very long period. This situation becomes unacceptable to the land users	Select suitable local and exotic multipurpose tree/shrub species adapted to the local conditions (Acacia spp., Eucalyptus spp., Grevillea robusta etc). Construct water-harvesting structures (trenches, micro-basins). Raise awareness among land users through meetings and training.
Investment costs are rather high for land users	Credits, loans, cooperatives.
Inequitable share of benefits	Awareness should be increased through enhancing the LLPP approach.

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Chadokar PA: Multipurpose Plant Species for Soil and Water Conservation. Assistance to Soil and Water ConservationProgramme. ETH/81/003. 1985.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Betru Nedassa: Biological Soil Conservation Measures. Land Rehabilitation and Reforestation Project. Project 2488MOA/WFP. 1995.