1.2 ព័ត៌មានលម្អិតពីបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ និងស្ថាប័នដែលចូលរួមក្នុងការវាយតម្លៃ និងចងក្រងឯកសារនៃបច្ចេកទេស

ឈ្មោះគម្រោងដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Potential and limitations for improved natural resource management (NRM) in mountain communities in the Rustaq district, Afghanistan (Rustaq NRM Study)

ឈ្មោះគម្រោងដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar, Afghanistan (LIPT)

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Terre des Hommes (Terre des Hommes) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (DEZA / COSUDE / DDC / SDC) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Bern University of Applied Sciences, School of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences (HAFL) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

1.3 លក្ខខណ្ឌទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈ វ៉ូខេត

អ្នកចងក្រង និង(បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ)យល់ព្រមទទួលយកនូវលក្ខខណ្ឌនានាទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈវ៉ូខេត:

បាទ/ចា៎

1.4 សេចក្តីប្រកាសស្តីពីចីរភាពនៃការពណ៌នាពីបច្ចេកទេស

តើបច្ចេកទេសដែលបានពណ៌នានេះមានបញ្ហាដែលផ្តោតលើការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី, បើដូច្នេះវាមិនអាចត្រូវបានប្រកាសថាជាបច្ចេកទេសនៃការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រកបដោយចីរភាពទេ?

ទេ

មតិយោបល់:

SLM practices documented in the frame of the Rustaq NRM study were established only recently (1-3 years ago). It is too early for a final judgment on the sustainability of these technologies within the human and natural environment of Chokar watershed.

1.5 ការយោងទៅលើកម្រងបញ្ជីសំណួរ (មួយ ឬច្រើន) នៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ SLM (ដែលបានចងក្រងដោយទស្សនៈពិភពលោកស្តីពីវិធីសាស្ត្រ និងបច្ចេកទេសងអភិរក្ស WOCAT)

2.1 ការពណ៌នាដោយសង្ខេបពីបច្ចេកទេស

និយមន័យបច្ចេកទេស:

Terraces are established on mountain slopes used mainly for cropping wheat, with the purpose of soil protection from erosion, preserving runoff, sediments and nutrients on-site. Improved seeds and fertilizer are applied on the terraces for increasing crop yield, but also vegetation cover and biomass production, and thus prevent further land degradation.

2.2 ការពណ៌នាលម្អិតពីបច្ចេកទេស

ការពណ៌នា:

Project supported implementation of terraces with application of improved seeds and fertilizer has taken place in the villages Sari Joy, Jawaz Khana and Dashti Mirzai, located in Chokar watershed of Rustaq District in Northern Afghanistan. The Chokar watershed is a mountainous area situated between 600 - 2,500 m above sea level. The climate is semi-arid with harsh and cold weather in winter and hot and dry summers. The annual precipitation in average years is 580mm. Land degradation affects all forms of land use and includes low vegetation cover, heavy top soil erosion from water, and poor soil fertility. Unsustainable agricultural practices, over-exploitation and high pressure on the natural resources are adversely impacting on the socio-economic well-being of local communities as well as contributing to the risk for being adversely affected by drought as well as landslides and flash floods triggered by heavy rainfall.
The data used for the documentation of the technology is based on field research conducted in Chokar watershed, namely in the villages: Sari Joy, Jawaz Khana and Dashti Mirzai. These villages represent the upper, the middle and the lower zone of Chokar watershed, respectively. They differ considerably in access to services and infrastructure, but in general are poorly served. The communities depend mainly on land resources for sustaining their livelihoods. In a good year with high yields, wheat-self-sufficiency lasts about 5 months.
Since 2012 the Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar (LIPT) implemented by Terre des hommes (Tdh) Switzerland has initiated a range of NRM interventions. The project introduced terraces as sustainable land management practices on private plots, situated on rolling (11-15%) and hilly (16-30%) slopes to protect the land from soil erosion and prevent the loss of water and fertile topsoil, seeds and fertilizers. The average plot size for terrace implementation is 2 Jerib (0.4 hectares) with contour strips of 40m x 4m. The height of the risers is 1m-1,5 m. Terrace benches are built along the contour by moving the soil above the bench downwards. The leveled benches of the terrace are cultivated with wheat. The risers of the terrace are mostly used for growing fodder crops, mostly alfalfa, which also helps to stabilize the terrace. If medicinal herbs (ferula) are included they are cultivated along the bench contours .
Maintenance activities include small repair work on the riser by adding some amount of soil and re-sowing of alfalfa seeds on those spots.
The terraces allow application of improved seeds and fertilizers without them being washed off. The land-users report noticeable increase of wheat yield from the terraced plot with application of improved seeds and fertilizer compared to the non-terraced plot. An average plot of 0.2 ha on non-terraced hilly cropland used to give about 70 kg of wheat (350kg/ha). On terraces the yield has increased/ doubled to 140 kg on the same plot area (700kg/ha). The expectations regarding terraces remain high as over the time the land user hope their land will become more stable and improved soil moisture and fertility will have positive impact on the productivity as well. However, so far no cost-benefit assessment has been conducted allowing attribution of individual measure to the wheat increase.
Many land users are interested in the terrace technology due to a number of environmental and economic benefits expected, however the costs for building the terrace are considered high by an average local land user. They have to rely on external support in order to have sufficient resources for implementation. Women considered an advantage that during the establishment phase, men were paid by the project to work on their own land (or other villagers land) when building the terraces. Thus, there was no need for men to go for seasonal labour migration and they stayed at home.

2.3 ​រូបភាពនៃបច្ចេកទេស

2.5 ប្រទេស/តំបន់/ទីតាំងកន្លែង ដែលបច្ចេកទេសត្រូវបានអនុវត្ត និងបានគ្រប់ដណ្តប់ដោយការវាយតម្លៃនេះ

2.6 កាលបរិច្ឆេទនៃការអនុវត្ត

ប្រសិនបើមិនច្បាស់ឆ្នាំ សូមបញ្ជាក់កាលបរិច្ឆេទដែលប្រហាក់ប្រហែល:

• តិចជាង 10ឆ្នាំមុន (ថ្មី)

2.7 ការណែនាំពីបច្ចេកទេស

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើបច្ចេកទេសត្រូវបានណែនាំឱ្យអនុវត្តដោយរបៀបណា:

• តាមរយៈគម្រោង / អន្តរាគមន៍ពីខាងក្រៅ

មតិយោបល់ (ប្រភេទនៃគម្រោង ។ល។):

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar (LIPT) supported by Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC) from 2012-17

3.1 គោលបំណងចម្បង (១​ ឬច្រើន)​ នៃបច្ចេកទេសនេះ

• ធ្វើឱ្យប្រសើរឡើងនូវផលិតកម្ម
• កាត់បន្ថយ, បង្ការ, ស្តារឡើងវិញនូវការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី

3.2 ប្រភេទដីប្រើប្រាស់មួយប្រភេទ (ច្រើនប្រភេទ) ដែលបានអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

3.3 បន្ទាប់ពីអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស តើដីប្រើប្រាស់មានការប្រែប្រួលដែររឺទេ?

មតិយោបល់:

Before implementation of the Technology, only annual crops were cultivated, with wheat as the main crop. Plots were ploughed along the countours mostly by animal traction. In recent years land users are starting to use tractors for ploughing, , where villages and plots are accessible by machinery.

3.4 ការផ្គត់ផ្គង់ទឹក

ការផ្គត់ផ្គង់ទឹកនៅកន្លែងអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស:

• ទឹកភ្លៀង

3.5 ក្រុម SLM ដែលបច្ចេកទេសស្ថិតនៅក្នុង

• វិធានការអនុវត្តកាត់ទទឹងទីជម្រាល

3.6 វិធានការ SLM ដែលបញ្ចូលនូវបច្ចេកទេស

មតិយោបល់:

Agronomic measures: Terraces increase the economic viability of applying improved seeds and (chemical) fertilizer to badly nutrient depleted cropland.
Vegetative measures: Alfalfa is planted on the risers for stabilizing the terraces, and as an important contribution to fodder cropping.
Structural measures: The leveling of countour strips allows to harvest water and sediments.

3.7 កំណត់ប្រភេទនៃការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដីសំខាន់ៗដែលបច្ចេកទេសនេះបានដោះស្រាយ

3.8 ការពារ កាត់បន្ថយ ឬស្តារឡើងវិញនៃការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី

បញ្ជាក់ពីគោលដៅរបស់បច្ចេកទេស ដែលផ្តោតទៅការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី:

• ការកាត់បន្ថយការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី
• ការជួសជុល/ ស្តារឡើងវិញនៃឱនភាពដីធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ

4.1 គំនូសបច្ចេកទេសនៃបច្ចេកទេសនេះ

4.2 ព័ត៌មានទូទៅដែលពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងការគណនាធាតុចូល និងថ្លៃដើម

កំណត់របៀបនៃការគណនាថ្លៃដើម និងធាតុចូល:

• ក្នុងតំបន់អនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

កំណត់រូបិយប័ណ្ណសម្រាប់ថ្លៃដើម:

• ដុល្លារ

បើពាក់ព័ន្ធសូមកំណត់អត្រាប្តូរប្រាក់ពីដុល្លាទៅរូបិយប័ណ្ណតំបន់ (ឧ.​​ 1 ដុល្លារ​ = 79.9 រៀលនៃរូបិយប័ណ្ណប្រេស៊ីល) ៖ 1 ដុល្លារ =:

67,0

4.3 សកម្មភាពបង្កើត

	សកម្មភាព	រយៈពេល​ (រដូវកាល)
1.	Selection of the area for establishing a terrace (Men)	Autumn
2.	Designing of the terrace using A-frame, assisted by trained technician/project staff (Men)	End of autumn after rainy days
3.	Leveling the soil with a shovel (Men)	Autumn/Winter
4.	Sowing of alfalfa seeds on the risers (Men/women)	After 20 days of sowing wheat
5.	Sowing of wheat seeds on benches (Men/Women)	Winter/Spring
6.	Sowing of ferula along the contours (Men/women)	Winter/Spring

4.4 ថ្លៃដើម និងធាតុចូលដែលត្រូវការសម្រាប់ការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេស

	បញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូល	ឯកតា	បរិមាណ	ថ្លៃដើមក្នុងមួយឯកតា	ថ្លៃធាតុចូលសរុប	% នៃថ្លៃដើមដែលចំណាយដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Designing of the terrace using A-frame	person-day	10,0	9,0	90,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Leveling the soil with a shovel	person-day	150,0	5,3	795,0	51,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Sowing of wheat and alfalfa seeds	person-day	10,0	5,3	53,0	51,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Sowing of ferula	person-day	2,0	5,3	10,6	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Pick axe	Pcs	1,0	3,0	3,0	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Pitchfork	Pcs	1,0	5,3	5,3	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Wheel barrow	Pcs	1,0	38,0	38,0	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Shovel	Pcs	1,0	3,8	3,8
សម្ភារៈ	Hoe	Pcs	1,0	7,5	7,5
សម្ភារៈ	A-Frame	Pcs	1,0	6,0	6,0
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	Wheat seeds	Kg	140,0	0,42	58,8
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	Alfalfa seeds	Kg	17,5	0,42	7,35	100,0
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	Ferula seeds	Kg	2,5	6,35	15,88	100,0
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	DAP	Kg	125,0	0,9	112,5
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	Urea	Kg	125,0	0,45	56,25
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	Herbicide	Liter	50,0	0,25	12,5
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបក្នុងការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេស					1275,48
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបក្នុងការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេសគិតជាដុល្លារ					19,04

ប្រសិនបើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីមិនមានថ្លៃដើម 100% សូមបញ្ជាក់ថានរណាដែលចំណាយថ្លៃដើមដែលនៅសល់:

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar (LIPT) implemented by Terre des Hommes (Tdh)

មតិយោបល់:

Equipment provided by the project was re-used for the implemenation of different SLM practices on different plots. For completness equipment costs are fully accounted for.
Costs calculated for a Technology area of 1ha was only done for the purpose of the WOCAT documentation. In reality SLM plots are on average 0.4 ha or 2 jiribs. Costs were simply multiplied by 2.5. The actual costs for a 1ha plot might be slightly different.

4.5 សកម្មភាពថែទាំ

	សកម្មភាព	ពេលវេលា/ ភាពញឹកញាប់
1.	Ploughing the land with animal traction (Men)	Winter/Spring/Annually
2.	Sowing of wheat seeds on benches (Men/Women)	Winter/Spring/Annually
3.	Application of fertilizer (Men/Women)	Fall
4.	Weeding (Women)	Summer
5.	Harvesting wheat (Men and women together)	Summer/Fall
6.	Harvesting alfalfa (Men and women together)	Summer/Fall
7.	Collecting and delivering harvested wheat (Men and women)	Fall
8.	Collecting and delivering harvested alfalfa (Men and women)	Fall
9.	Repairing terrace risers with a shovel (Men)	Winter/Spring/After heavy rain or snow
10.	Sowing alfalfa seeds on the repaired area (Men/Women)	Winter/Spring/When required

4.6 កំណត់ថ្លៃដើមសម្រាប់ការថែទាំ/ សកម្មភាពរបស់បច្ចេកទេស (ក្នុងរយៈពេលមួយឆ្នាំ)

	បញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូល	ឯកតា	បរិមាណ	ថ្លៃដើមក្នុងមួយឯកតា	ថ្លៃធាតុចូលសរុប	% នៃថ្លៃដើមដែលចំណាយដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Ploughing the land with animal traction	person day	2,5	5,3	13,25	100,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Sowing of wheat seeds on benches	person day	5,0	5,3	26,5	100,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Weeding and Fertilizer application	person day	5,0	5,3	26,5	100,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Harvesting and delivering wheat and alfalfa	person day	70,0	5,3	371,0	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Sickle	Pcs	1,0			100,0
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	Wheat seeds	Kg	140,0	0,42	58,8	100,0
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	DAP	Kg	125,0	0,9	112,5	100,0
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	Urea	Kg	125,0	0,45	56,25	100,0
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	Herbicide	Liter	50,0	0,25	12,5	100,0
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបសម្រាប់ការថែទាំដំណាំតាមបច្ចេកទេស					677,3
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបសម្រាប់ការថែទាំដំណាំតាមបច្ចេកទេសគិតជាដុល្លារ					10,11

ប្រសិនបើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីមិនមានថ្លៃដើម 100% សូមបញ្ជាក់ថានរណាដែលចំណាយថ្លៃដើមដែលនៅសល់:

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar (LIPT) implemented by Terre des Hommes (Tdh)

មតិយោបល់:

Costs calculated for a Technology area of 1ha was only done for the purpose of the WOCAT documentation. In reality SLM plots are on average 0.4 ha or 2 jiribs. Costs were simply multiplied by 2.5. The actual costs for a 1ha plot might be slightly different.

4.7 កត្តាសំខាន់បំផុតដែលមានឥទ្ធិពលដល់ការចំណាយ

ពណ៌នាពីកត្តាប៉ះពាល់ចម្បងៗទៅលើថ្លៃដើម:

Due to the remoteness of the villages where the Technology has been implemented, all the inputs for establishment, such as agricultural equipment, plant material, fertilizers, etc., are purchased in Rustaq town. The expenses for traveling and delivering the inputs affect the establishment costs.

5.1 អាកាសធាតុ

5.2 សណ្ឋានដី

មតិយោបល់ និងបញ្ចាក់បន្ថែមអំពីសណ្ឋានដី :

The information was derived from two different sources:
-SLM implementers information provided in the Land User Protocol (LUP) during an FGD
-Elevation and slope statistics derived for terraced plots from ASTGTM. ASTGTM is the ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model V002 with a 30 m spatial resolution. More information on ASTGTM is available here: https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/node/1079. The data can be downloaded here: https://gdex.cr.usgs.gov/gdex/

5.3 ដី

បើអាចសូមភ្ជាប់ការពណ៌នាពីដីឱ្យបានច្បាស់ ឬព័ត៌មានដែលអាចទទួលបាន ឧ. ប្រភេទដី, pH ដី/ ជាតិអាស៊ីត, សមត្ថភាពផ្លាស់ប្តូរកាចុង, វត្តមាននីត្រូសែន, ភាពប្រៃ ។ល។:

Local land users differentiate between the following soil types where terraces are implemented:
-Light soils: moderately deep; texture of topsoil medium (loamy, silty); low topsoil organic matter
-Dark soils: moderately deep; texture of topsoil medium (loamy, silty); medium topsoil organic matter

5.4 ទឹកដែលអាចទាញមកប្រើប្រាស់បាន និងគុណភាពទឹក

តើមានបញ្ហាភាពទឹកប្រៃហូរចូលមកដែរឬទេ?

ទេ

តើទឹកជំនន់កំពុងកើតមាននៅតំបន់នេះដែររឺទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

ភាពទៀងទាត់:

ម្តងម្កាល

មតិយោបល់ និងលក្ខណៈពិសេសផ្សេងៗទៀតលើគុណភាព និងបរិមាណទឹក​ :

Floods occur mainly during the rainy seasons in spring and autumn. Availability of surface water differs for the three study villages Sari Joy, Jawaz Khana, and Dashti Mirzai. Sari Joy has sources and good surface water availability. Jawaz Khana has poor water availability as water has to be fetched from a lower laying stream. Dashti Mirzai has good water availability also from an irrigation channel.

5.5 ជីវៈចម្រុះ

5.6 លក្ខណៈនៃអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីដែលអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

5.7 ទំហំផ្ទៃដីជាមធ្យមនៃដីប្រើប្រាស់ដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី ក្នុងការអនុវត្ត​បច្ចេកទេស

5.8 ភាពជាម្ចាស់ដី កម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ដី និងកម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ទឹក

ភាពជាម្ចាស់ដី:

• ឯកជន មិនមានកម្មសិទ្ធ

កម្មសិទ្ធិប្រើប្រាស់ដី:

• ឯកជន

កម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ទឹក:

• ជាក្រុម (មានដែនកំណត់)

មតិយោបល់:

Those who own land and use water for irrigation are obliged to pay for the water. The payment is made both in kind and in cash to the Mirob, the person in charge of distributing water in the community. The amount of the payment varies from village to village.

6.1 ផលប៉ះពាល់ក្នុងបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេសដែលកើតមាន

ផលប៉ះពាល់លើសេដ្ឋកិច្ចសង្គម

ផលិតផល

ផលប៉ះពាល់ទៅលើវប្បធម៌សង្គម

ផលប៉ះពាល់ទៅលើអេកូឡូស៊ី

វដ្តទឹក/លំហូរ

ដី

ជីវចម្រុះ៖ ដំណាំ, សត្វ

6.2 ផលប៉ះពាល់ក្រៅបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេសដែលកើតមាន

វាយតម្លៃផលប៉ះពាល់ក្រៅបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស (វាស់វែង):

These comments apply to 6.1 and 6.2:
- Socio-economic impacts: Based on the Land User Protocols: Individual SLM implementers were asked to rate the benefits for their Technology. They were asked to indicate production increase of crops; fodder; animals; wood; non-wood forest products; increase in product diversity; or production area. The most important increase they rated with 3, the second most with 2, others with 1 point. Averages of the points given by all SLM implementers are reflected here.
- Ecological impacts and off-site impacts: Based on the Land User Protocols: Individual SLM implementers were asked to rate the on-site and off-site impacts of the Technology on water; soil; and vegetation. They were asked to indicate the strength of impacts with three, two or one points. Averages of the points given by all implementers are reflected here.

6.3 ភាពប្រឈម និងភាពរួសនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ និងគ្រោះអាកាសធាតុ/ គ្រោះមហន្តរាយ (ដែលដឹងដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី)

គ្រោះអាកាសធាតុ (មហន្តរាយ) ​

គ្រោះមហន្តរាយធម្មជាតិ

	លក្ខណៈឆ្លើយតបនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ
ព្យុះភ្លៀងតាមតំបន់	ល្អណាស់

គ្រោះមហន្តរាយអាកាសធាតុ

	លក្ខណៈឆ្លើយតបនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ
រាំងស្ងួត	ល្អ

មតិយោបល់:

Based on the multi-criteria matrix: SLM implementers from three villages were asked to jointly discuss and rate how much the SLM technology reduced the lands vulnerability to drought and local rainstorms. Only vulnerability to the most prevalent climate extremes (drought and local rainstorms) was discussed. SLM technologies were rated as reducing vulnerability poorly , well, or very well. The average points reflected here are from multi-criteria matrices compiled in three villages where the SLM technology had been implemented.

6.4 ការវិភាគថ្លៃដើម និងអត្ថប្រយោជន៍

មតិយោបល់:

Costs: As larger parts of the establishment of the technology were covered by the project, farmers consideration of the total costs are likely underestimated.
Benefits: Two plots were terraced in 2012, and 5 plots in 2013. However, most terraces were implemented in 2014 (11 plots ) and 2015 (8 plots). The Rustaq NRM study was conducted in autumn 2016. 1-2 years of cultivating the terrace system is too short a period for providing evidence on short- and long-term returns.

6.5 ការទទួលយកបច្ចេកទេស

• 1-10%

បើអាច សូមបញ្ជាក់ពីបរិមាណ (ចំនួនគ្រួសារ និង/ ឬតំបន់គ្របដណ្តប់):

10.7 ha has been terraced within the 3 study villages with LIPT project support.

ក្នុងចំណោមគ្រួសារទាំងអស់ដែលបានអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស តើមានប៉ុន្មាន​គ្រួសារ​ដែល​ចង់​ធ្វើ​ដោយ​ខ្លួន​ឯង ដោយមិន​ទទួល​បាន​សម្ភារៈ​លើក​​ទឹកចិត្ត/​ប្រាក់ឧបត្ថម្ភ?​:

• 0-10%

មតិយោបល់:

Based on the Land User Protocol: Individual SLM implementers were asked whether they received support for implementing the Technology. Each indicated the type of support he received from the proposed options: "Full Support 100%, Some Support, No Support 0%". 3 implementers claimed full project support, 22 claimed some support, and 1 implementer claimed no project support.

6.6 ការបន្សុំា

តើថ្មីៗនេះ បច្ចេកទេសនេះត្រូវបានកែតម្រូវ​ដើម្បី​បន្ស៊ាំ​ទៅនឹង​ស្ថាន​ភាព​ប្រែប្រួល​ដែរ​ឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

បើឆ្លើយបាទ/ ចា៎ សូមកំណត់ថាតើស្ថានភាពប្រែប្រួលមួយណាត្រូវបានបន្ស៊ាំ:

• បម្រែបម្រួលទីផ្សារ

បញ្ជាក់ពីការបន្ស៊ាំនៃបច្ចេកទេស (ការរៀបចំ, ឧបករណ៍/ប្រភេទ​ ។ល។):

Ferula is planted on the terrace in addition to wheat and alfalfa. The resin-like gum from the dried sap extracted from the stem and roots of Ferula is in high demand as a basic product for pharmaceuticals. Ferula can be sold to local merchants, who resell it to India, and is thus intercropped by some farmers on the terraces.

6.7 ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាសនៃបច្ចេកទេស

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាសនៅកន្លែងរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
Notable higher crop yields on the plots where improved seeds and fertilizer are applied on newly established terraces. Farmers have high expectations for the years to come and for yields of annual crops (such as wheat) to remain high.
Diversity of crops planted on terraces is valued by the land users. For example, cultivating wheat and alfalfa on the terraced plot provides household with the key crop and also fodder for the livestock and thereby contributes to securing food for the family and maintaining better health of their cattle. Additionally, some farmers have started intercropping Ferula, a medical herb and cash crop.
Farmers percieve soil quality on terraced plots with fertilizer application to improve. An improvement in soil fertility (which may relate first of all to the effects of fertilizer application) and increased soil moisture have been reported. Single statements also related to effectiveness of applying fertilizer on terraced plots, as here fertilizer is not washed away during rains.
Terraced plots are considered less vulnerable to the effects of rainstorms and dry spells, than non-terraced plots on slopes where annual crops are cultivated.
Women considered an advantage that during the establishment phase, men were paid by the project to work on their own land when building the terraces. Thus, there was no need for men to go for seasonal labour migration and they stayed at home. At the same time the terracing of the land is seen as an opportunity to improve the land resources on their families plots. An increase in women's workload related to bringing food to the field during establishment was considered to be acceptable, especially compared to the expected increase in yields.

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស​ ទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ
The application of fertilizer on terraces is expected to show multiple effects: yields from these fertility depleted croplands can be increased. This includes an increase in biomass production, which may be used as green manure on the field or as animal feed or as straw. Further, vegetation cover during the growing period can be increased, which helps to protect the soil from erosive rains.
The project paid establishment of terraces on farmers' plots provided 20 days of employment per 2 jerib (0.4 ha) plot for farmers in their home villages. At the same time the terracing is a long-term investment into the land resources. Terracing provides an opportunity to decrease soil degradation and even to rehabilitate degraded lands. Application of improved seeds and fertilizer contribute in the establishment year to increased crop and fodder yields.

6.8 ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យនៃបច្ចេកទេស និងវិធីសាស្ត្រដោះស្រាយ

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
The implementation costs are high and land users state that it is impossible for them to cover establishment costs on their own.
Farmers expectations partly exceeded the actual yield harvested from the terraces in the first years after the implementation.
Both men and women from households that have implemened terraces state that during the establishment year the household experiences an increased workload, that is not well compatible with other on-going household / farm activities.
The production area for annual crops only is slighty reduced.	So far not all farmers seem to use the production area fully. Intercropping with perennial plants is recommended in order to use the risers of the terraces for fodder production. Some farmers have started intercropping of Ferula as cash crop.
Sufficient own land is required.	How does the amount of cropland affect the innovation readiness of a farmer? A better understanding is required on farmers willingness to take a risk for investing in a new SLM technology, and especially terracing, and influencing factors.

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកចងក្រងឬបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
The technology requires technical knowledge for implementation and maintenance, which is key for successful adoption, replication and upscaling. The project trained technicians to support land users with the design of terraces. While the project aided implementation of terraces has improved the general knowledge and awareness of the land users on the benefits of SLM practices, most farmers will not be able to design terraces on their own.
Technically correct design of the terrace presents a challenge and might not be always achieved. Forward sloping terrace benches may lead to channeled runoff and have the risk of rills and gully formation.
There is an attribution gap regarding the increased wheat yields, especially with regard to individual contribution of the terraces, the application of improved seeds and the fertilizer, and the combined effects (role of terraces in making improved seed and fertilizer application effective).	A cost benefit analysis (CBA) needs to be conducted to determine short- and long-term returns of the SLM technology. On farm trials are necessary for assessing impacts of the different measures (agricultural, vegetative and structural measures) before-and-after, as well as with-without the SLM technology.
Terrace maintenance is crucial. If not maintained properly for a longer period of time, the damaged terrace can lead to further land degradation through channeled runoff, sever erosion and possible risks of disaster for the surrounding settlements on the slopes.
The technology is established mainly by better-off households, which own more land than the average SLM implementer.

7.1 វិធីសាស្ត្រ/ ប្រភពនៃព័ត៌មាន