1.2 Detalhes do contato das pessoas capacitadas e instituições envolvidas na avaliação e documentação da tecnologia

Nome do projeto que facilitou a documentação/avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar, Afghanistan (LIPT)

Nome do projeto que facilitou a documentação/avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

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

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/ avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

Terre des Hommes (Terre des Hommes) - Suíça

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/ avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

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

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/ avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

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

1.3 Condições em relação ao uso da informação documentada através de WOCAT

Quando os dados foram compilados (no campo)?

17/10/2016

O compilador e a(s) pessoa(s) capacitada(s) aceitam as condições relativas ao uso de dados documentados através do WOCAT:

Sim

1.4 Declaração de sustentabilidade da tecnologia descrita

A tecnologia descrita aqui é problemática em relação a degradação da terra de forma que não pode ser declarada uma tecnologia de gestão sustentável de terra?

Não

1.5 Referência ao(s) questionário(s) sobre as abordagens da GST

2.1 Descrição curta da tecnologia

Definição da tecnologia:

A plan for rotational grazing has been developed to control pasture use and prevent overgrazing of rehabilitated pastures.

2.2 Descrição detalhada da tecnologia

Descrição:

Livestock keeping is one of the key livelihood strategies in rural Rustaq, in addition to cultivation of cereals. Families rely on their livestock not only for consumption of meat from cattle, goats and sheep, and dairy products such as milk and sour milk, but also as means of transportation (donkeys), labour in agriculture (oxen, donkeys) and as a source of income through sales. Naturally, every family strives to increase their household’s livestock as much as they can, which increases the pressure on the local pastures - leading to extensive overgrazing. The pastures in Jawaz Khana and Sari Joy are characterized by poor vegetation cover, low carrying capacity and severe erosion with deep rills clearly visible. Heavy rains in spring and autumn wash off the topsoil on pastures, resulting in heavy erosion, landslides and gully formation. These severely degraded pastures continue to be used though "open access" - without any management schemes or regulations in place. Some pastures that are not suitable for grazing have been converted to arable lands and tree plantations. The quantity and quality of livestock fodder is insufficient for all the livestock, and this affects animal health.

Plans for rotational grazing were prepared for the communities in Sari Joy and Jawaz Khana to organize the use of local pastures and prevent their further degradation. Rotational grazing plans regulate the frequency and intensity of livestock grazing on the pastures. The area is seeded with alfalfa to improve the fodder stock and enhance the quality of the pasture. For up to three years the seeded area is closed to grazing, during which period the community is provided with stocks of hay and straw to feed their livestock as an alternative. After the end of the closure period, the grazing area is divided into 6-7 sections (paddocks) depending on the area of the pasture. The livestock graze the first paddock for 7 days and move to the next paddock. Each paddock is grazed for the period of 7 days during April and May. From the month of May the grazing area is closed for resting. The livestock move to the summer pastures for the rest of the summer months.

The community is key in preparing the grazing plans and identifying the pastures where these plans will be applied, as well as the conditions which are part of it, such as the frequency of the grazing period. Frequent meetings need to be held with the community livestock holders to explain the purpose of the rotational grazing and how it can be beneficial in pasture improvement. The Natural Resources Management Committee and the technical staff of the Livelihood Improvement Project (LIPT) are in charge of engaging the local pasture users to meet their needs and consider their views accordingly.

The actual implementation of the rotational grazing plans is difficult to assess for the time being. The grazing area is not fully restored and the fodder stock remains low. Many land users do not fully understand the concept behind the rotational grazing plans or their purpose. In an area where there is a severe shortage of livestock fodder and very limited grazing land, accepting and following these plans will require more time and additional support in terms of awareness-raising and support feeding of the livestock during the exclusion period. The villagers have some doubts about the costs and benefits of grazing and rotation. They have no full understanding of the benefits of the rotational grazing for their household and are likely to be not ready to adhere to such schemes.

Women are part of the livestock management system, and are in charge of feeding and taking care of the livestock. However, they are not aware about the plans for rotational grazing in their village and how are these plans are applied in practice.

2.3 Fotos da tecnologia

2.5 País/região/locais onde a tecnologia foi aplicada e que estão cobertos nesta avaliação

2.6 Data da implementação

Indique o ano de implementação:

2015

Caso o ano exato seja desconhecido, indique a data aproximada:

• menos de 10 anos atrás (recentemente)

2.7 Introdução da tecnologia

Especifique como a tecnologia foi introduzida:

• através de projetos/intervenções externas

Comentários (tipos de projeto, etc.):

Livelihood Improvement Project in Takhar (LIPT) implemented by Terre des hommes (Tdh) Switzerland

3.1 Principal/principais finalidade(s) da tecnologia

• Melhora a produção
• Reduz, previne, recupera a degradação do solo

3.2 Tipo(s) atualizado(s) de uso da terra onde a tecnologia foi aplicada

Caso o uso da terra tenha mudado devido a implementação da tecnologia, indique seu uso anterior à implementação da tecnologia:

Some areas under the Technology are former croplands, which have been completely degraded and no longer suitable for crop cultivation.

3.3 Mais informações sobre o uso da terra

Abastecimento de água para a terra na qual a tecnologia é aplicada:

• Precipitação natural

Número de estações de cultivo por ano:

• 1

3.4 Grupo de GST ao qual pertence a tecnologia

• Gestão de pastoralismo e pastagem

3.5 Difusão da tecnologia

Especifique a difusão da tecnologia:

• Uniformemente difundida numa área

Caso a tecnologia seja uniformemente difundida numa área, indique a área coberta aproximada:

• 0,1-1 km2

Comentários:

6 ha

3.6 Medidas de GST contendo a tecnologia

3.7 Principais tipos de degradação da terra abordados pela tecnologia

3.8 Redução, prevenção ou recuperação da degradação do solo

Especifique o objetivo da tecnologia em relação a degradação da terra:

• Recuperar/reabilitar solo severamente degradado

4.1 Desenho técnico da tecnologia

4.2 Especificações técnicas/ explicações do desenho técnico

After the end of the exclusion period the grazing area is divided into 6-7 sections (paddocks) depending on the area of the pasture. The livestock graze the first paddock for 7 days and move to the next paddock after 7 days. Each paddock is grazed for the period of 7 days during April and May. From the month of May the grazing area is closed for resting. The livestock move to the summer pastures for the rest of the summer months.

4.3 Informação geral em relação ao cálculo de entradas e custos

Especifique como custos e entradas foram calculados:

• por área de tecnologia

Especifique a moeda utilizada para os cálculos de custo:

• Dólares norte-americanos

Indique a taxa cambial do dólar norte americano para a moeda local (se relevante): 1 USD =:

67,0

4.4 Atividades de implantação

	Atividade	Tipo de medida	Periodicidade
1.	Selection of the pasture area and awareness raising among people	Gestão	Fall
2.	Leveling of the land	Agronômico	Fall
3.	Sowing alfalfa seed	Agronômico	Spring
4.	Site under quarantine	Gestão	Three years
5.	Preparation of the grazing plan and community meetings	Gestão	Fall
6.	Protection of the site during quarantine	Gestão	Three years

4.5 Custos e entradas necessárias para a implantação

	Especifique a entrada	Unidade	Quantidade	Custos por unidade	Custos totais por entrada	% dos custos arcados pelos usuários da terra
Mão-de-obra	Leveling the land with a rake	person-day	150,0	5,3	795,0	71,0
Mão-de-obra	Sowing alfalfa	person-day	5,0	5,3	26,5	71,0
Mão-de-obra	Preparation of grazing plan	person-day	2,0	9,0	18,0
Mão-de-obra	Protection of the site	year	1,0	447,0	447,0	100,0
Equipamento	Shovel	piece	1,0	3,8	3,8	100,0
Equipamento	Rope	Meter	50,0	0,15	7,5	100,0
Equipamento	Rake	piece	1,0	3,0	3,0	100,0
Material vegetal	Alfalfa seed	kg	17,5	0,42	7,35
Fertilizantes e biocidas	DAP	kg	125,0	0,9	112,5
Fertilizantes e biocidas	Urea	kg	125,0	0,45	56,25
Custos totais para a implantação da tecnologia					1476,9

Se o usuário da terra arca com menos que 100% dos custos, indique quem cobre os custos remanescentes:

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

4.6 Atividades recorrentes/manutenção

	Atividade	Tipo de medida	Periodicidade/frequência
1.	Community agrees to leave the pasture for resting/ exclusion	Gestão	Three years
2.	Rotational grazing	Outras medidas	Spring/week/grazing plot
3.	Reseeding alfalfa	Vegetativo	After 5 years
4.	Protection of the site	Gestão	Three years

4.7 Custos e entradas necessárias pata a manutenção/atividades recorrentes (por ano)

	Especifique a entrada	Unidade	Quantidade	Custos por unidade	Custos totais por entrada	% dos custos arcados pelos usuários da terra
Mão-de-obra	Reseeding alfalfa	person day	5,0	5,3	26,5	100,0
Mão-de-obra	Protection during exclusion	year	2,0	447,0	894,0	100,0
Material vegetal	Alfalfa seed	kg	17,5	0,42	7,35	100,0
Custos totais para a manutenção da tecnologia					927,85

Comentários:

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.

4.8 Fatores mais importantes que afetam os custos

Descreva os fatores mais determinantes que afetam os custos:

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 Clima

5.2 Topografia

5.3 Solos

Caso disponível anexe a descrição completa do solo ou especifique as informações disponíveis, p. ex. tipo de solo, PH/acidez do solo, nitrogênio, capacidade de troca catiônica, salinidade, etc.

Local land users differentiate between the following soil types where the technology is implemented:
- Red: shallow; texture medium, coarse; low organic matter
- Light: moderately deep; texture medium; medium, low organic matter

5.4 Disponibilidade e qualidade de água

A salinidade da água é um problema?

Não

Ocorre inundação da área?

Sim

Regularidade:

Esporadicamente

Comentários e outras especificações sobre a qualidade e a quantidade da água:

Floods occur mainly during the rainy seasons in spring and autumn. Availability of surface water differs for the villages of Sari Joy and Jawaz Khana. Sari Joy has good surface water availability. Jawaz Khana has poor water availability as water has to be fetched from a stream lower down.

5.5 Biodiversidade

5.6 Características dos usuários da terra que utilizam a tecnologia

Indique outras características relevantes dos usuários da terra:

The land users in the area where the Technology is applied belong to the Uzbek ethnic minority group Qarluq.
Although the men are generally the main land users, women and children also take active part in the related work. The functions of men and women are clearly distinguished within Afghan society. At the same time within the family this division of work and functions also results in men and women working hand-in-hand. An improvement of the family’s livelihood situation is expected to positively affect all family members. While, it is recognized that the involvement of women is key in order to secure basic human rights for everyone, to achieve good governance, sustainable development, and to efficiently contribute to poverty reduction (SDC 2004), it is also clear that a context sensitive approach is of high importance.
Women in rural Afghanistan are involved in many production and income generating activities that contribute to the overall household income, however, very few women own resources such as land and livestock, and their income generating options are fewer in comparison to that of men.

5.7 Média da área de terra própria ou arrendada por usuários da terra que utilizam a tecnologia

5.8 Propriedade de terra, direitos de uso da terra e de uso da água

Propriedade da terra:

• Comunitário/rural

Direitos do uso da terra:

• Comunitário (organizado)

Direitos do uso da água:

• Comunitário (organizado)

Comentários:

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.

5.9 Acesso a serviços e infraestrutura

6.1 Impactos no local mostrados pela tecnologia

Impactos socioeconômicos

Produção

Impactos ecológicos

Ciclo hídrico/escoamento

Solo

Biodiversidade: vegetação, animais

6.2 Impactos externos mostrados pela tecnologia

Comentários relativos à avaliação de impacto:

These comments apply to 6.1 and 6.2:
- Socio-economic impacts: Individual SLM implementers were asked to rate the benefits from the technology. They were asked to indicate production increase of crops; fodder; animals; wood; non-wood forest products; increase in prduct 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 terrace implementers are reflected here.
- Similarly for the "ecological impacts" and on "off-site impacts": 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 terrace implementers are reflected here.
- Socio-cultural impacts: This section is answered by the scientists, based on information collected during focus group discussions, and interviews conducted with persons from the 3 villages where the LIPT project implemented the technology.

6.3 Exposição e sensibilidade da tecnologia às mudanças climáticas graduais e extremos/desastres relacionados ao clima (conforme o ponto de vista dos usuários da terra)

Extremos (desastres) relacionados ao clima

Desastres meteorológicos

	Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Temporal local	muito bem

Desastres climatológicos

	Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Seca	bem

Comentários:

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 matrixes compiled in three villages where the SLM technology had been implemented.

6.4 Análise do custo-benefício

Como os benefícios se comparam aos custos de implantação (do ponto de vista dos usuários da terra)?

Como os benefícios se comparam aos custos recorrentes/de manutenção(do ponto de vista dos usuários da terra)?

Comentários:

SLM implementers from three villages were asked to jointly discuss and rate the SLM technologies short term (1-3 years) and long-term (10 years) return. As most of the technologies have only been implemented 1-2 years ago, it is too early to compare benefits to maintenance costs. Farmers have little experience so far on the actual benefits of the SLM technologies. The ratings are mostly based on expected benefits and not on actual benefits.

6.5 Adoção da tecnologia

• casos isolados/experimental

Se disponível, determine a quantidade (número de unidades familiares e/ou área abordada):

6 ha

Comentários:

Rotational grazing plans are developed for common lands used by the whole village. There is one common grazing plan for each village.

6.6 Adaptação

A tecnologia foi recentemente modificada para adaptar-se as condições variáveis?

Não

6.7 Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades da tecnologia

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do compilador ou de outra pessoa capacitada
If implemented according to the plan and the pasture area is allowed to rest, the quality and quantity of the fodder will be enhanced.

6.8 Pontos fracos, desvantagens/riscos da tecnologia e formas de superá-los

Pontos fracos/vantagens/riscos na visão do compilador ou de outra pessoa capacitada	Como eles podem ser superados?
The land users have no full knowledge about the plans for rotational grazing and how they should be applied	Increase awareness raising among the land users

7.1 Métodos/fontes de informação

7.2 Referências às publicações disponíveis

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

Guidelines for Focus Groups Discussions

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

Methods section of the Rustaq NRM study