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)

Integrated natural resources management in drought-prone and salt-affected agricultural production landscapes in Central Asia and Turkey ((CACILM-2))

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

Kazakh Research Institute for Livestock and Fodder Production (Kazakh Research Institute for Livestock and Fodder Production) - Kazakhstan

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 helps to restore degraded land

1.5 Référence au(x) Questionnaires sur les Approches de GDT (documentées au moyen de WOCAT)

2.1 Courte description de la Technologie

Définition de la Technologie:

Conservation agriculture applied in Northern Kazakhstan is based on no-tillage direct sowing of cereals into the soil permanently covered by crop residues. It contributes to reverse soil degradation, enhance water use efficiency, increase crop productivity in the rainfed lands.

2.2 Description détaillée de la Technologie

Description:

The cropping system in Northern Kazakhstan is based mainly on continuous wheat production using conventional technologies. Negative components of this system are intensive tillage, returning little organic matter to the land and monoculture. This system has led to soil degradation (wind and water erosion), soil fertility loss, boost-up of diseases, weed infestation and other problems.

Conservation Agriculture (CA) involves removing these negative components of conventional farming systems and includes three basic principles: 1) minimal soil disturbance, 2) permanent soil cover with crop residues and 3) crop rotation.
In accordance with these principles,

Conservation Agriculture technology includes 3 main operations:
1. Sowing with simultaneously soil fertilization using direct seeder.
2. Post-sowing (after 1-2 days) treatment by non-selective herbicide
3. Harvesting combined with simultaneous plant residues chopping and spreading

For comparison Conventional technology includes 7 operations:
1. Deep fall soil tillage (25 cm).
2. Early spring soil treatment.
4. Pre-sowing soil treatment.
5. Sowing with simultaneously soil fertilization using conventional seeder.
6. Selective herbicide application 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2-4-D).
7. Harvesting.

The CA technology was applied in four farms in Akmola and North-Kazakhstan oblasts:
1.Farm “DARYN”, village Valikhanovo, Zharkainsky rayon, Akmola oblast, Kazakhstan.
2.Farm “Surayev”, village Vishnevka, Arshalinsky rayon, Akmola oblast, Kazakhstan.
3.Farm “Dostyk”, village Astrahanovka, Arshalinsky rayon, Akmola oblast, Kazakhstan.
4. Farm “Cherezdanov”, village Smirnovo, Akkayinskii rayon, Northern Kazakhstan oblast, Kazakhstan.


Depending on the capability of these four farms in total 330 ha agricultural land were allocated for the testing and adaptation of the technology. On each farm, field trials under equal conditions (soil, temperature, humidity, landscape, etc.) were conducted and included 2 treatments: Conventional (7 operations) and Conservation Agriculture (3 operations).
Analysis of 2002-2004 trials data demonstrated that yield of wheat and other cereals under CA technology was in average 15-25% higher in comparison with the conventional technology. The advantages of CA technology are especially evident in the years of drought (up to 40% in dry 2004 year). Economic evaluation of the technology made by two independent experts from Kazakhstan (Kazakh Research Institute for Grain Farming) and USA (Idaho State University) suggested that costs of labor, fuel, repairs and spare parts as well as machinery and equipment wearing-out under the Conservation Agriculture technologies is significantly lower as compared to those of traditional technology. In general, it is important to emphasize that the experience of the CA adaptation in North Kazakhstan helped farmers/land-users:
•To determine the appropriate level of tillage in a cropping system that is feasible with direct sowing and CA technology requirements as a potential goal.
•To retain sufficient residue on the soil surface to reduce soil erosion, enhance crop/water productivity, improve soil fertility (because of plant organic material bioprocessing in the soil) and better ensure long term, sustainable production.
•Employ economically viable, diversified crop rotations that can improve cropping system productivity and offer farmers new options to reduce risk that is extremely important for the conditions of Northern Kazakhstan relating to the area of risk farming.

The introduction of the technology for cereal production in the rainfed areas of Kazakhstan was realized within the framework of the FAO/TCP/KAZ/2801 (T) Project “Conservation Agriculture for Sustainable Crop Production in Northern Kazakhstan”, under active cooperation with counterparts: Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan (MoA RK), FAO, CIMMYT, Union of Farmers of Kazakhstan (UFK), national agriculture research organizations.

2.3 Photos de la Technologie

2.4 Vidéos 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:

2002

2.7 Introduction de la Technologie

Spécifiez comment la Technologie a été introduite: :

• par le biais de projets/ d'interventions extérieures

Commentaires (type de projet, etc.) :

FAO TCP/KAZ/2801 (T) Project “Conservation Agriculture for Sustainable Crop Production in Northern Kazakhstan”
The project was initiated by UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) under active cooperation with counterparts: Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan (MoA RK), FAO, CIMMYT, Union of Farmers of Kazakhstan (UFK), national agriculture research organizations. The project was aimed to testing, adaptation and introduction of Conservation Agriculture technology for cereal production in Northern Kazakhstan. At the present time the technology is applied on the area of around 3 mln ha in Northern Kazakhstan.

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

• améliorer la production
• réduire, prévenir, restaurer les terres dégradées
• conserver/ améliorer la biodiversité
• s'adapter au changement et aux extrêmes climatiques et à leurs impacts
• créer un impact économique positif

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)

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

Non

3.4 Approvisionnement en eau

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

• pluvial

Commentaires:

average annual rainfall: 250 mm

3.5 Groupe de GDT auquel appartient la Technologie

• Amélioration de la couverture végétale/ du sol
• perturbation minimale du sol

3.6 Mesures de GDT constituant la Technologie

Commentaires:

CA technology implies retention plant residues (chopped and spread) in the field. This is organic matter in huge quantities. Due to biological processing of this substance the soil fertility as well as soil quality are improved.

3.7 Principaux types de dégradation des terres traités par la Technologie

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

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.	Snow Retention	Dec-Feb
2.	Herbicides (Glyphosate) Application	May
3.	Direct sowing, fertilizing	May
4.	Herbicide Application	June
5.	Harvest and Hauling	Aug-Sep

Commentaires:

SNOW RETENTION: By leaving stubbles on the field to improve soil moisture storage.
HAULING: Farmers in Kazakhstan have to transport harvested yield to the special Grain storage/elevator, located distantly remotely, usually it is one elevator for one district. This is transportation expenses

4.4 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	Permanent and seasonal workers	person-days	242,7	22,0	5339,4
Equipements	Fuel	liter	5374,28	0,35	1881,0
Equipements	Modification of seeders and sprayers		2,0	1240,8	2481,6
Equipements	Machinery Depreciation (7 Unit of equipment)		7,0	1427,5	9992,5	100,0
Equipements	Machinery Interest (7 Unit of equipment)		7,0	646,4	4524,8	100,0
Matériel végétal	Wheat Seed	kg	40764,7	0,17	6930,0
Engrais et biocides	Fertilizer: Ammonium Phosphate	kg	33000,0	0,1	3300,0
Engrais et biocides	Herbicide: Broadleaf	liter	330,0	5,5	1815,0
Engrais et biocides	Herbicide: Glyphosate	liter	990,0	6,5	6435,0
Autre	Land	ha	330,0	12,88	4250,4	100,0
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie					46949,7
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie en dollars américains (USD)					46949,7

Si le coût n'est pas pris en charge à 100% par l'exploitant des terres, indiquez qui a financé le coût restant:

The contribution from land users (4 Farms) were amounted to 18 767,7 USD. The remaining costs were covered by the funds of the project FAO / TCP / KAZ / 2801 (T) Project “Conservation Agriculture for Sustainable Crop Production in Northern Kazakhstan”

Commentaires:

- The "Labor" section provides the average data on the salary costs of permanent and seasonal workers

- Total costs for establishment of the Technology per 1 ha is 142,27 USD

- In general, the stage of establishment requires more expenses, in particular for acquiring a direct seeder or modifying the traditional one. In this case the additional expenses were made for modification of local seeders and sprayers.

4.5 Activités d'entretien/ récurrentes

	Activité	Calendrier/ fréquence
1.	Snow Retention	Dec-Feb
2.	Herbicides (Glyphosate) Application	May
3.	Direct sowing, fertilizing	May
4.	Herbicide Application	June
5.	Harvest and Hauling	Aug-Sep

4.6 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	Permanent and Seasonal Workers	person/days	242,7	22,0	5339,4
Equipements	Fuel	liter	5374,28	0,35	1881,0
Equipements	Equipment repairs and service		2,0	1240,8	2481,6
Equipements	Machinery Depreciation (7 Unit of equipment)		7,0	1427,5	9992,5	100,0
Equipements	Machinery Interest (7 Unit of equipment)		7,0	646,4	4524,8	100,0
Matériel végétal	Wheat seads	kg	40764,7	0,17	6930,0
Engrais et biocides	Fertilizer: Ammonium Phosphate	kg	33000,0	0,1	3300,0
Engrais et biocides	Herbicide: Broadleaf	liter	330,0	5,5	1815,0
Engrais et biocides	Herbicide: Glyphosate	liter	825,0	6,5	5362,5
Autre	Land	ha	330,0	12,88	4250,4	100,0
Coût total d'entretien de la Technologie					45877,2
Coût total d'entretien de la Technologie en dollars américains (USD)					45877,2

Si le coût n'est pas pris en charge à 100% par l'exploitant des terres, indiquez qui a financé le coût restant:

The contribution from land users (4 Farms) amounted to 18767.7 USD. The remaining costs were covered by the funds of the project FAO / TCP / KAZ / 2801 (T) Project “Conservation Agriculture for Sustainable Crop Production in Northern Kazakhstan”

Commentaires:

The "Labor" section provides the average data on the salary costs of permanent and seasonal workers.
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology per 1 ha is 139,0 USD

The totals of establishment and maintenance costs not the same due to the difference in the rate of use of the glyphosate herbicide (3 l/ha vs 2.5 l / ha)

4.7 Facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts

Décrivez les facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts :

CA technology shows some clear economic advantages compared to the traditional system. Production costs for CA are slightly higher, associated primarily with the cost of glyphosate. But they are partially reimbursed by lower costs fot labor, fuel and ownership costs associated with a slight reduction in equipment use. However, additional revenue associated with the higher yields experienced for CA compensates for the higher production costs.

5.1 Climat

5.2 Topographie

Indiquez si la Technologie est spécifiquement appliquée dans des:

• non pertinent

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: 1 m.

5.4 Disponibilité et qualité de l'eau

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

Non

La zone est-elle inondée?

Non

5.5 Biodiversité

5.6 Caractéristiques des exploitants des terres appliquant la Technologie

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:

• état

Droits d’utilisation des terres:

• loué

Droits d’utilisation de l’eau:

• communautaire (organisé)

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

Oui

Précisez:

Land lease for 49 years
according to the Land code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Commentaires:

Land ownership in Kazakhstan is on state and individual basis. Lands of large farms are owned by state, and farmers can use these lands only for farming purpose based on long-term agreement (rent) for up to 49 years with relevant state authorities and bodies. Smallholder farmers mostly owned agriculture lands (average size around 10 ha) individually.

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	bien
températures saisonnières	été	augmente	bien
précipitations annuelles		décroît	bien
précipitations saisonnières	été	décroît	bien

Extrêmes climatiques (catastrophes)

Catastrophes météorologiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
pluie torrentielle locale	bien
tempête de neige locale	bien
tempête de sable/ de poussière locale	bien

Catastrophes climatiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
sécheresse	bien

Catastrophes hydrologiques

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

• 11-50%

Si disponible, quantifiez (nombre de ménages et/ou superficie couverte):

about 3 mln ha under Conservation Agriculture in Kazakhstan now

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? :

• 0-10%

Commentaires:

Kazakhstan is now included among the top ten countries with the largest areas under CA in the world (Source: FAOSTAT).

6.6 Adaptation

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

Non

6.7 Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités de la Technologie

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
A special advantage of Conservation Agriculture is observed in extremely dry conditions. It allows to consider this technology as water-conserving, which is critical for risky farming area in Kazakhstan.
Conservation Agriculture is not inferior to traditional technologies and is competitive in the regional cereal production system and promising given their role in soil fertility recovery, cost reduction, increase in labor productivity and positive effect on the environment.
The wide-scale use of Conservation Agriculture in Kazakhstan, shift of farms to modern cropping systems are realistic and promising.

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Based on the data on yield, ecological, soil and agronomic parameters and economic analysis, the Conservation Agriculture can be considered as effective and promising for the region. It will allow for farmers to switch to modern farming systems based on diversified crop production, minimal soil treatment, stubble retention, and direct seeding.
The modified local seeders, in general, performed well and can be used under production conditions. The possibility to locally produce direct seeders and well-established herbicide and fertilizer production suggest feasible wide-scale application of CA technology for crop production in the country.
Under current conditions, it is extremely important to intensify collaboration between national agricultural systems and international organizations and research centers. They actively use their large international expertise, modern technologies, rich genetic pool to facilitate a rapid integration of a country’s agrarian sector into the world system.

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?
High costs at the 1st stage of technology implementation	State support programs or land user cooperation needed
Weed control problems	Weed control is one aspect that needs further research. Herbicides are costly in Kazakhstan, especially when compared to depressed grain prices. Options for weed control with different weed spectra and these different conditions must be available. One of the ways to combat is the crop rotation. Potential for more diversified systems in northern Kazakhstan exists. Policy emphasis should be placed on market development for alternative crops.

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
Equipment availability for resource-poor farmers	There are many inexpensive models of direct seeders and other equipment for CA in the world market. Farmers need in marketing services, technical consultations. Subsidizing purchase of CA equipment by government can help farmers to advance the process of CA adoption in country and region.
Delayed effect (it takes time to get all the benefits of the technology)	Provision of long-term low interest loans
The problem of farmers' awareness of technology, its features and benefits	Awareness needs to be raised

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

1.Karabaev M., Vasko I., Matyushkov M., Bektemirov A., Kenzhebekov A., Bakhman T., Friedrich T., Makus L., Morgunov A., Darinov A., Sagimbaev M., Suraev V., Perezdanov V ., Rodionov A., Wall P. Zero-processing and direct sowing technologies for the cultivation of grain crops in Northern Kazakhstan. 2005. FAO-SIMMIT, 64 p. (in Russian)

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

2.Shpigun S., Karabayev M.No-till and direct seeding technologies for cereals in North Kazakhstan. - Practical recommendations for farmers. Astana, Kazakhstan, 2007, 15 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

3.Karabayev M., Yuschenko N., Akramkhanov A., and Shpigun S.Forage crops production in dry areas with an allowance for ecological risks. - Methods of seeding and growing of perennial and annual grasses. Astana, Kazakhstan, 2007, 112 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

4.CIMMYT Wheat Improvement Program for Kazakhstan. Together in 21st Century. - 2008, CIMMYT, 56 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

5.Yushenko N., Iskakov Z., Karabayev M., Shpigun S., Yushenko D., Shaushekov T., Baitassov A. Perennial grasses cropping in abandoned lands of Central Kazakhstan based on Conservation Agriculture. – Drylands Management, World Bank-GEF-MOEP Kazakhstan, 2008, p.38-43.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

6.No-Till with Soil Cover and Crop Rotation: A Basis for Policy Support to Conservation Agriculture for Sustainable Production Intensification. – Proceedings of the International Consultation Conference, 8-10 July, 2009, Astana-Shortandy, Kazakhstan. CIMMYT, FAO, Ministry of Agriculture, Kazakhstan, 2009, p. 350.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

7.Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux International (CABI). 2011. Climate Change and Crop Production. Oxfordshire, UK: CABI, 292 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

8.FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2011. Save and Grow: A Policymaker’s Guide to the Sustainable Intensification of Smallholder Crop Production. Rome, Italy: FAO.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

9.Ospanbayev Zh., Koishibayev M., Karabayev M., Zhapayev R., Bedoshvili D., Zhunusov K. 2010. Winter wheat direct seeding technology on rainfed lands. Recommendations for farmers, Almaty, Kazakhstan, 13 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

10.Karabayev M., Ushenko N., Baitassov A., Ushenko D., Ishmukhanbetov S. 2011. Conservation agriculture for hayfields and pastures under agricultural landscapes of Central Kazakhstan // INAT-AGRO, GEF, UNDP, CIMMYT. Astana, Kazakhstan, 39 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

11.Ushenko N., Ushenko D., Baitassov A. 2011. Adaptation of no till and direct seeding of cereals in agricultural landscapes of Central Kazakhstan // CIMMYT, ACP, Astana, Kazakhstan, 22 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

12.Advancement and impact of conservation agriculture/no-till technology adoption in Kazakhstan. FAO Investment Centre, Information Note, December 6, 2012

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

13.Karabayev M., P.Wall., K.Sayre, R.Zhapayev, A.Morgounov, V.Dvurechenski, N.Yushenko, T.Friedrich, T.Fillecia, A.Jumabayeva, M.Guadagni. Adoption of Conservation Agriculture in Kazakhstan // Soil-Water Journal. 2013, Vol. 2, # 2, p. 2003-2006.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

14.Zhapayev R., K.Iskandarova, M.Karabayev, K.Toderich. Ecological testing of the sorghum genotypes in South-East Kazakhstan // Agroecological bases of improvement the productivity and sustainability of Agriculture in the XXI century. 2013, Kazakhstan, p. 124-127.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

15.Karabayev M., V.Dvurechenski, P.Wall, K.Sayre, T.Friedrich, N.Yushenko, Zh.Ospanbayev, R.Zhapayev, A.Morgounov, A.Darinov, A.Nazarenko, E.Gossen, T.Fillecia, M.Guadagni. Conservation Agriculture in Kazakhstan // CIMMYT-Kazakhstan, 2013, 32 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

16.Karabayev M., A.Morgounov, P.Wall, K.Sayre, Y.Zelenskiy, R.Zhapayev, V.Dvurechenskii, A.Akhmetova, T.Friedrich, T.Fileccia, M.Guadagni. Conservation Agriculture and breeding for sustainable wheat production in Kazakhstan // Journal of Bahri Dagdas Crop Research, 2014, (1-2), 50-53 p.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

17.Nurbekov A., A.Akramkhanov, J.Lamers, A.Kassam, T.Friedrich, R.Gupta, H.Muminjanov, M.Karabayev, D.Sydyk, J.Turok, M.Bekenov. Conservation Agriculture in Central Asia (chapter) // Conservation Agriculture. Global prospects and challenges. CABI (CAB Int.), 2014, UK-USA, p.223-248.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

18.Karabayev M., A.Morgounov, H.-J.Braun, P.Wall, K.Sayre, Yu.Zelenskiy, R.Zhapayev, A.Akhmetova, V.Dvurechenskii, K.Iskandarova, T.Friedrich, T.Fileccia, M.Guadagni. Effective approaches to wheat improvement in Kazakhstan: Breeding and Conservation Agriculture // Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, USA, 2014, v.4, #10, p.761-765.

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

19.Goddard T., Basch G., Derpsh R., Hongwen L., Jin H., Karabayev M., Moriya K., Peiretti R., Smith H. Institutional and policy support for CA uptake // Advances in Conservation Agriculture, Volume 1: Systems and Science, Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing, Cambridge, UK, 2020, (ISBN: 978 1 78676 264 1; www.bdspublishing.com), 52 p.

7.3 Liens vers les informations pertinentes en ligne

Titre/ description:

No-Till: A Climate Smart Agriculture Solution for Kazakhstan (World Bank)

URL:

http://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2013/08/08/no-till-climate-smart-agriculture-solution-for-kazakhstan

7.4 Observations d'ordre général

Open access to the Global Database on Sustainable Land Management give opportunities to all interested parties, namely farmers, scientists, decision-makers to use the technologies and experience that has been accumulated and tested in practice in regions and countries with similar climatic conditions. This opportunity is especially valuable for regions affected of climate change, in particular, prone to drought and salinization. It is necessary to disseminate more widely the information on the availability and possibilities of using this database in the target audience.