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

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

International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) - Liban

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

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

Commentaires:

The technology supports the rehabilitation of degraded rangelands; the Vallerani plough forms micro water harvesting pits suitable for native shrub seedlings. This boosts vegetation recovery through both out-planted shrubs and the emergence of local seeds.

2.1 Courte description de la Technologie

Définition de la Technologie:

Mechanized micro water harvesting breaks up crusted and compacted soils, and fosters the capture and retention and the deep-infiltration of surface runoff generated during heavy rainfall events. The micro water harvesting pits store water and provide soil moisture to the out-planted shrub seedlings and the emerging seeds - and thus boosts the development of resilient vegetation patches towards the eventual rehabilitation of degraded rangelands.

2.2 Description détaillée de la Technologie

Description:

The micro water harvesting technology is part of a larger watershed rehabilitation initiative; It is the most upstream technology used in an integrated approach, including upland rehabilitation (Vallerani), gully erosion control, and revegetation (gully plugs), and downstream local barley agriculture using the ‘Marab’ technology.

1: Main Elements: The Vallerani tractor plow (Delfino 50 MI/CM) (Gammoh & Oweis, 2011) constructs intermittent water harvesting pits along the contour of terrain and transects the hill slopes at approximately 5-10 m between lines. The local hill slope (at the implementation site) ranges between 2% and 15%. Pit length is adjustable and relates to the speed of the tractor. At the implementation site, pit lengths are around 4.5 m. In the micro water harvesting pits, several native shrub seedlings can be out-planted (at the site, 2 per pit).

2: Where: This technology is used in a watershed context close to Al Majeddyeh village, located in the Middle Badia zone, approximately 30 km south-east of Amman. The climate is arid and warm (Palmer, 2013). The average annual rainfall is around 130 mm. The natural environment is classified as steppe, Bsh in the köppen classification. The human environment is characterized by agropastoralists. They are semi-nomadic and live in villages around the watershed, for example, Al Majeddyeh village.

3: The purpose of the technology: Breaking the land degradation cycle by retaining and encouraging deep-infiltration of surface runoff, which supports native vegetation growth. The stored soil moisture boosts the growth of both out-planted shrub seedlings and emerging local seeds towards healthy and resilient vegetation patches. Over time, the plowed pits degrade, but vegetation takes over the dryland hydrological functions of rainfall interception, runoff deceleration, and fostering infiltration. The developing shrubland provides various ecosystem services, predominately fodder for livestock of local agropastoralists.

4: Major activities: 1) Mechanized micro water harvesting establishment through the Vallerani tractor plow. 2) plantation of native seedlings in the pits (2 shrubs per pit at the local site). 3) Manage rangelands through sustainable grazing.

5: Impact: The technology breaks up the degradation cycle, increases soil moisture, and eventually boosts vegetation development and biodiversity. Through retention of runoff, sediments and residues, it decreases erosion and enhances organic carbon storage. It reduces peak surface runoff and thus mitigates flooding. The enhanced biomass supports livestock (grazing) and reduces agricultural inputs required (such as those required for low input barley production).

6: Land users' opinion: Land users evaluate the technology ambivalently. In the short term, landowners are often skeptical, because the rehabilitation requires a recovery time and strict non-grazing/resting for (usually) the first 2 rainy seasons. Thereafter, the rehabilitated lands require sustainable management. Later, after vegetation development, most landowners are convinced of the improvements and understand the economic and environmental value. The acceptance strongly depends on the social and cultural context – many farmers continue preferring the already established barley monoculture, mainly due to lack of sustainable rangeland management options and land ownership. However, well-targeted awareness campaigns can be supportive.

2.3 Photos de la Technologie

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

2.6 Date de mise en œuvre de la Technologie

Indiquez l'année de mise en œuvre:

2016

2.7 Introduction de la Technologie

Spécifiez comment la Technologie a été introduite: :

• au cours d'expérimentations / de recherches
• par le biais de projets/ d'interventions extérieures

Commentaires (type de projet, etc.) :

This specific project was serving as a basis for SLM introduction and was launched in 2016.
The Vallerani Plough was locally tested in earlier projects.
The Vallerani Plough in Badia rehabilitation context was first introduced in Syria in 2004-2007.

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

• améliorer la production
• réduire, prévenir, restaurer les terres dégradées
• préserver l'écosystème
• protéger un bassin versant/ des zones situées en aval - en combinaison avec d'autres technologies
• s'adapter au changement et aux extrêmes climatiques et à leurs impacts

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

Les divers types d'utilisation des terres au sein du même unité de terrain: :

Non

3.3 Est-ce que l’utilisation des terres a changé en raison de la mise en œuvre de la Technologie ?

Est-ce que l’utilisation des terres a changé en raison de la mise en œuvre de la Technologie ?

• Non (Passez à la question 3.4)

3.4 Approvisionnement en eau

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

• pluvial

Commentaires:

The technology harvests surface runoff of erratic and heavy rainstorms

3.5 Groupe de GDT auquel appartient la Technologie

• Amélioration de la couverture végétale/ du sol
• mesures en travers de la pente
• récupération/ collecte de l'eau

3.6 Mesures de GDT constituant la Technologie

Commentaires:

Native shrubs (fodder shrubs) planted in the water harvesting pits.
Intermittent pits constructed by the Vallerani Plough
Management (grazing) plan after implementation

3.7 Principaux types de dégradation des terres traités par la Technologie

Commentaires:

Degradation is mainly caused by over-exploitation of vegetation (overgrazing), mechanized agriculture (ploughing and barley seeding) – but accelerated by climate change.

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:

• réduire la dégradation des terres
• restaurer/ réhabiliter des terres sévèrement dégradées

4.1 Dessin technique de la Technologie

4.2 Informations générales sur le calcul des intrants et des coûts

Spécifiez la manière dont les coûts et les intrants ont été calculés:

• par superficie de la Technologie

Indiquez la monnaie utilisée pour le calcul des coûts:

• dollars américains

4.3 Activités de mise en place/ d'établissement

	Activité	Calendrier des activités (saisonnier)
1.	Site Selection (biophysical suitability)	At least 1 year prior implementation
2.	Site inspection & local community consultation (social assessment, awareness and planning)	Around 1 year prior implementation
3.	Ploughing of micro water harvesting pits along the contour (e.g. laser guided)	Late dry season (at least 1 month prior rainy season onset)
4.	Out-planting of native shrubs seedlings (e.g. Atriplex and Ratameh) – potentially community inclusive activity	After first substantial rainfall (e.g. > 5mm rainfall event)
5.	Sustainable management by the local community (grazing and resting plan)	Approximately after 2 years (sustainable grazing includes certain resting – chance for seeds production and recruitment)

4.4 Coûts et intrants nécessaires à la mise en place

	Spécifiez les intrants	Unité	Quantité	Coûts par unité	Coût total par intrant	% des coût supporté par les exploitants des terres
Main d'œuvre	Tractor plough operation	Labour Day per hectare	0,2	25,0	5,0
Main d'œuvre	Technical assistance	LD	0,2	50,0	10,0
Main d'œuvre	Seedling planters (local community)	LD	5,0	20,0	100,0
Equipements	Tractor + Vallerani Plough (transport & fuel)	Day	0,2	200,0	40,0
Equipements	Field equipment	Day	1,0	20,0	20,0
Matériel végétal	Atriplex Halimus	Seedling	100,0	0,5	50,0
Matériel végétal	Retama	Seedling	100,0	0,5	50,0
Matériel végétal	Salsola	Seedling	100,0	0,5	50,0
Autre	Transportation and storage (e.g. seedlings)	Lumpsum per hectare	1,0	20,0	20,0
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie					345,0
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie en dollars américains (USD)					345,0

Commentaires:

The shrub seedlings used were of high quality. A local community was used for labour. These two items increase costs per hectare – costs per hectare can be significantly reduced using ‘cheap’ seedlings or professional agricultural labour. However, the purpose of the project was local community inclusion and their benefit.

4.5 Activités d'entretien/ récurrentes

	Activité	Calendrier/ fréquence
1.	Sustainable grazing (take half / leave half concept)	1-2 times per season
2.	Cut and carry	locally
3.	Resting for shrub-seed production and new recruitment	Some selected resting seasons

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

Commentaires:

The technology aims at re-establishing a sustainable nature-based ecosystem. Once properly implemented and managed, no further maintenance is needed. Certainly, ‘costs’ during biomass facilitation accrue through, e.g., herding and watering of livestock; however, these costs are not considered to occur because of the landscape improvement.

4.7 Facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts

Décrivez les facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts :

The most important cost is the high-quality seedlings and the local labor costs. Both can be reduced.

5.1 Climat

5.2 Topographie

Indiquez si la Technologie est spécifiquement appliquée dans des:

• non pertinent

Commentaires et précisions supplémentaires sur la topographie:

Site topography ranges from 853 to 910 m above sea level (ASL), with an average slope steepness of 7.4 %.

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.

The soil texture ranges from silty clay to silty clay loam.
Soil pH ranges from 8 – 8.5.
The soil is not saline.

5.4 Disponibilité et qualité de l'eau

La salinité de l'eau est-elle un problème? :

Non

La zone est-elle inondée?

Oui

Régularité:

fréquemment

5.5 Biodiversité

Commentaires et précisions supplémentaires sur la biodiversité:

Atriplex, Ratameh and Salsola were actively out-planted (native species). This is not very biodiverse, but the evolving micro-habitat within the water harvesting pit allows emergence of collected seeds and consequential development of biodiverse vegetation patches

5.6 Caractéristiques des exploitants des terres appliquant la Technologie

Indiquez toute autre caractéristique pertinente des exploitants des terres:

The actual landowners and users are often poor Jordanians. However, the owners of the large livestock flocks (potential facilitators of the rehabilitated lands) are comparatively rich.

5.7 Superficie moyenne des terres utilisées par les exploitants des terres appliquant la Technologie

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

Propriété foncière:

• individu, avec titre de propriété

Droits d’utilisation des terres:

• individuel

• NA

Est-ce que les droits d'utilisation des terres sont fondés sur un système juridique traditionnel?

Oui

5.9 Accès aux services et aux infrastructures

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

Biodiversité: végétale, animale

Réduction des risques de catastrophe et des risques climatiques

6.2 Impacts hors site que la Technologie a montrés

6.3 Exposition et sensibilité de la Technologie aux changements progressifs et aux évènements extrêmes/catastrophes liés au climat (telles que perçues par les exploitants des terres)

Changements climatiques progressifs

Changements climatiques progressifs

	Saison	Augmentation ou diminution	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
températures annuelles		augmente	très bien
précipitations annuelles		décroît	très bien

Extrêmes climatiques (catastrophes)

Catastrophes météorologiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
pluie torrentielle locale	très bien

Catastrophes climatiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
conditions hivernales extrêmes	très bien

Catastrophes hydrologiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
crue éclair	très bien

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

• 1-10%

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

• 11-50%

6.6 Adaptation

La Technologie a-t-elle été récemment modifiée pour s'adapter à l'évolution des conditions?

Oui

autre (précisez):

watershed approach and transition status of the structures

Spécifiez l'adaptation de la Technologie (conception, matériaux/ espèces, etc.):

Implementation efficiency increase through adding contour laser technique and using the reversible blade (2 directions plowing)

6.7 Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités de la Technologie

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Opportunity for agro-pastoralism (grazing up to twice a year)
Improved livestock health, milk quantity, and quality.
No input costs needed (compared with e.g. barley agriculture)
Flexibility in timing: grazing of healthy rangelands can be done ‘at any time’(certainly spring season is most beneficial for livestock) – which differs from barley agriculture approach.

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Besides out-planting of native shrub seedlings, native biodiversity evolves through the emergence of dormant seed material.
Out-planted shrub seedlings withstand extreme weather conditions (droughts) through water harvesting. The survival rate and eventual success of the rehabilitation approach are high.
Micro water harvesting structures and upcoming vegetation patches reduce erosion and increase trapping of sediments, including organic carbon and seed materials.
Water harvesting reduces the peak of surface runoff and thus mitigates downstream flooding

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

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue de l’exploitant des terres	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
Costs of implementation and availability of high-quality seedlings and the Vallerani plow.	Develop large-scale procedure/initiative that allows farmers to request and restore vulnerable areas using the Vallerani micro-water harvesting technique. Include incentives for implementation (ex. free seedlings, free of charge using of Vallerani machine, subsidies on arley as fodder for the first two years in order for farmers to maintain the site)
Change: Not all farmers are willing to forgo barley agriculture	Demonstrating the effects this technology through pilot projects. Local communities on the forefront of communication.
Vegetation growth may attract herders from different areas.	Clear rules and legislation on land facilitation in terms of grazing.
Requires higher understanding of the environment and long-term planning	Introduce knowledge sharing events to teach local farmers on the effects of land degradation and the benefits of healthy ecosystems

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
Land ownership: current land tenure system in Jordan slows the adoption of the intervention. A landowner can reside in a city (no much value for the land), and the land user may be a herder. A large flock owner can rent huge areas for barley cultivation (actual cost of 1 donum of barley plantation ranges between 1.5-3 USD; possible to prepare up to 10 ha per day). Cheap labor/herders will move flocks and graze until all cover is gone (usually for 1-3 months maximum per year (March-May)). Rehabilitated areas will be of less interest for such users.	Develop and apply strict land management plans and policies. Create a strong monitoring system. Apply penalties for actions that increase land degradation with various on-site and off-sites impacts
Lack of institutional collaboration for rangeland management and rehabilitation. Land management in the Badia is the responsibility of several ministries in Jordan. The lack of institutional collaboration and the absence of the rangeland areas' valuation create a difficult environment for sustainability measures.	Increase the collaboration between ministries and stakeholders. Evaluate the impact of restoration solutions on the site and off site.
Lack of clear government policy for restoration, incentives for farmers, and funding availability.	Develop a clear action plan among the responsible government institutions of restoration activities.
Complex social context. The majority of land users and/or landowners don’t value the restoration. The bare cultivation practices have more (quick) value without resting time.	Capacity development for local communities for the value of soil, water, and biodiversity

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Akroush, S., & All, E. (2016). Factors Affecting the Adoption of Water Harvesting Technologies: A Case Study of Jordanian Arid Area. Sustainable Agriculture Research.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Akroush, S., & Boubaker, D. (2015). Predicted Willingness of Farmers to Adopt Water Harvesting Technologies: A Case Study from the Jordanian Badia (Jordan). American-Eurasian J. Agricultural & Environmental science , 1502-1513.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Gammoh, & Oweis. (2011). Performance and Adaptation of the Vallerani Mechanized Water Harvesting System in Degraded Badia Rangelands . Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 1370-1380.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Haddad, M. (2019). Exploring Jordan's Rangeland Transition: Merging Restoration Eperiment with Modeling - A Case study from Al Majdiyya Village. Amman: The University of Jordan.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Vallerani. (n.d.). Vallerani system. Retrieved from Vallerani: http://www.vallerani.com/wp/

7.3 Liens vers les informations pertinentes en ligne

Titre/ description:

VALLERANI MICRO WATER HARVESTING

URL:

https://www.icarda.org/impact/impact-stories/vallerani-micro-water-harvesting

Titre/ description:

CONTOUR LASER GUIDING FOR THE MECHANIZED “VALLERANI” MICRO-CATCHMENT WATER HARVESTING SYSTEMS

URL:

https://www.icarda.org/publications/10291/contour-laser-guiding-mechanized-vallerani-micro-catchment-water-harvesting

7.4 Observations d'ordre général

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 seedbed, and construction of a bund-and-spillway system creating several compartments for flood-irrigated agriculture.
For more information please visit: https://qcat.wocat.net/en/wocat/technologies/view/technologies_5770/