Technologies

Conservation Agriculture for cereal production in rainfed areas of Kazakhstan [Kazakhstan]

Conservation Agriculture for cereals production in rainfed agriculture lands

technologies_5673 - Kazakhstan

Completeness: 94%

1. Informação geral

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

Pessoa(s)-chave

Expert/Consultant:

Karabayev Muratbek

CIMMYT-Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Integrated natural resources management in drought-prone and salt-affected agricultural production landscapes in Central Asia and Turkey ((CACILM-2))
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Kazakh Research Institute for Livestock and Fodder Production (Kazakh Research Institute for Livestock and Fodder Production) - Kazakhstan

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

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through 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 sustentável de gestão de terra?

Não

Comentários:

The technology helps to restore degraded land

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

Awareness  Raising for SLM Using Conservation Agriculture
approaches

Awareness Raising for SLM Using Conservation Agriculture [Kazakhstan]

Raising awareness and strengthening the capability and skills of farmers, agriculture specialists and researchers in developing and adoption resource-saving, profitable and environmentally friendly cereal production through Conservation Agriculture practices.

  • Compilador/a: Kulyash Iskandarova

2. Descrição da tecnologia de gestão sustentável da terra

2.1 Descrição curta da tecnologia

Definição da tecnologia:

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 Descrição detalhada da tecnologia

Descrição:

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 Fotos da tecnologia

2.4 Vídeos da tecnologia

Comments, short description:

not available

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

Country:

Kazakhstan

Region/ State/ Province:

Northern Kazakhstan: Akmola and North Kazakhstan regions (provinces)

Further specification of location:

Smirnovo village, Akkayin district, Northern Kazakhstan region; Valikhanovo village, Zharkainsk district, Akmola region; Astrahanovka village, Astrahanskyi district, Akmola region; 4) Vishnevka village, Arshalinsky district, Akmola region

Especifique a difusão da tecnologia :
  • Uniformemente difundida numa área
Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

Não

Comentários:

1) Farm “Cherezdanov”, Smirnovo village, Akkayin district, Northern Kazakhstan region, located approximately 60 kilometers south of Petropavlovsk and 700 km from Astana (Nur-Sultan). The farm Head is Vyacheslav Cherezdanov.

2) Farm “Daryn”, Valikhanovo village, Zharkainsk district, Akmola region, located approximately 600 kilometers southwest of Astana (Nur-Sultan). The Head is Auezkhan Darynov.

3) Farm “Dostyk 06”, Astrahanovka village, Astrahanskyi district, Akmola region, located approximately 110 kilometers west of Astana (Nur-Sultan). The Head is Meyram Sagimbayev.

4) Farm “Surayev”, Vishnevka village, Arshalinsky district, Akmola region, located approximately 60 kilometers south of Astana (Nur-Sultan). The Head is Viktor Surayev.

2.6 Data da implementação

Indique o ano de implementação:

2002

2.7 Introdução da tecnologia

Especifique como a tecnologia foi introduzida:
  • através de projetos/intervenções externas
Comentários (tipos de projeto, 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. Classificação da tecnologia de gestão sustentável da terra

3.1 Principal/principais finalidade(s) da tecnologia

  • Melhora a produção
  • Reduz, previne, recupera a degradação do solo
  • Preservar/melhorar a biodiversidade
  • Adaptar a mudanças climáticas/extremos e seus impactos
  • Criar impacto econômico benéfico

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Não


Terra de cultivo

Terra de cultivo

  • Cultura anual
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - barley
  • cereals - oats
  • cereals - rye
  • cereals - wheat (spring)
Número de estações de cultivo por ano:
  • 1
Is intercropping practiced?

Não

Is crop rotation practiced?

Sim

If yes, specify:

Crop rotations at the project farms.
(In average, spring wheat occupies 50% of lands in crop rotations)

Plot/ field1st year2nd year3rd year
#1 Wheat Barley Wheat
#2 Rye Wheat Oat
#3 Wheat Oat Wheat
#4 Barley Wheat Rye

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?
  • No (Continue with question 3.4)
Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Não

3.4 Water supply

Abastecimento de água para a terra na qual a tecnologia é aplicada:
  • Precipitação natural
Comentários:

average annual rainfall: 250 mm

3.5 Grupo de gestão sustentável da terra ao qual pertence a tecnologia

  • Solo/cobertura vegetal melhorada
  • Perturbação mínima ao solo

3.6 Medidas de gestão sustentável da terra contendo a tecnologia

Medidas agronômicas

Medidas agronômicas

  • A2: Matéria orgânica/fertilidade do solo
  • A3: Tratamento da superfície do solo
  • A6: Residue management
A3: Differentiate tillage systems:

A 3.1: No tillage

A6: Specify residue management:

A 6.4: retained

Comentários:

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 Principais tipos de degradação da terra abordados pela tecnologia

Erosão do solo pela água

Erosão do solo pela água

  • Wt: Perda do solo superficial/erosão de superfície
Erosão do solo pelo vento

Erosão do solo pelo vento

  • Et: Perda do solo superficial
Deteriorização física do solo

Deteriorização física do solo

  • Pc: Compactação
Outro

Outro

Especifique:

loss of soil fertility due to wind and water erosion

3.8 Redução, prevenção ou recuperação da degradação do solo

Especifique o objetivo da tecnologia em relação a degradação da terra:
  • Reduzir a degradação do solo

4. Especificações técnicas, implementação de atividades, entradas e custos

4.1 Desenho técnico da tecnologia

Especificações técnicas (relacionada ao desenho técnico):

Sequence of main operations and elements of the technology implemented:

1) Direct sowing of wheat with seeder SZS 6.12 equipped with brazil disk openers and cutting discs, and simultaneous ammophos application at the rate of Р20
2) Herbicide treatment (Glyphosate 360) with sprayer OP-2000, 3.0 l/ha after wheat planting
3) Direct sowing spring wheat
4) Harvesting with chopping and overspreading of the straw

Technical specifications, dimensions, spacing of the experimental plots:

The total land area under the technology - 330 ha for 4 farms: «Cherezdanov», «Dostyk 06», «Suraev», «Daryn» (20 plots , 16.5 ha each)
1 plot - 16.5 ha (length - 702 m, width - 235 m)

Species used: wheat, barely, rye, oat. Different seed rates of spring wheat are used at the farms: from 105 kg/ha to 140 kg/ha.

Autor:

Muratbek Karabayev

Data:

09/08/2004

4.2 Informação geral em relação ao cálculo de entradas e custos

Especifique como custos e entradas foram calculados:
  • por área de tecnologia
Indique o tamanho e a unidade de área:

330 ha

Especifique a moeda utilizada para os cálculos de custo:
  • USD
Indique a média salarial da mão-de-obra contratada por dia:

22 USD

4.3 Atividades de implantação

Atividade Timing (season)
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
Comentários:

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 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 Permanent and seasonal workers person-days 242,7 22,0 5339,4
Equipamento Fuel liter 5374,28 0,35 1881,0
Equipamento Modification of seeders and sprayers 2,0 1240,8 2481,6
Equipamento Machinery Depreciation (7 Unit of equipment) 7,0 1427,5 9992,5 100,0
Equipamento Machinery Interest (7 Unit of equipment) 7,0 646,4 4524,8 100,0
Material vegetal Wheat Seed kg 40764,7 0,17 6930,0
Fertilizantes e biocidas Fertilizer: Ammonium Phosphate kg 33000,0 0,1 3300,0
Fertilizantes e biocidas Herbicide: Broadleaf liter 330,0 5,5 1815,0
Fertilizantes e biocidas Herbicide: Glyphosate liter 990,0 6,5 6435,0
Outros Land ha 330,0 12,88 4250,4 100,0
Custos totais para a implantação da tecnologia 46949,7
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 46949,7
Se o usuário da terra arca com menos que 100% dos custos, indique quem cobre os custos remanescentes:

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”

Comentários:

- 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 Atividades recorrentes/manutenção

Atividade Calendarização/frequência
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 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 Permanent and Seasonal Workers person/days 242,7 22,0 5339,4
Equipamento Fuel liter 5374,28 0,35 1881,0
Equipamento Equipment repairs and service 2,0 1240,8 2481,6
Equipamento Machinery Depreciation (7 Unit of equipment) 7,0 1427,5 9992,5 100,0
Equipamento Machinery Interest (7 Unit of equipment) 7,0 646,4 4524,8 100,0
Material vegetal Wheat seads kg 40764,7 0,17 6930,0
Fertilizantes e biocidas Fertilizer: Ammonium Phosphate kg 33000,0 0,1 3300,0
Fertilizantes e biocidas Herbicide: Broadleaf liter 330,0 5,5 1815,0
Fertilizantes e biocidas Herbicide: Glyphosate liter 825,0 6,5 5362,5
Outros Land ha 330,0 12,88 4250,4 100,0
Custos totais para a manutenção da tecnologia 45877,2
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 45877,2
Se o usuário da terra arca com menos que 100% dos custos, indique quem cobre os custos remanescentes:

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”

Comentários:

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 Fatores mais importantes que afetam os custos

Descreva os fatores mais determinantes que afetam os custos:

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. Ambiente naturale e humano

5.1 Clima

Precipitação pluviométrica anual
  • <250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1.000 mm
  • 1.001-1.500 mm
  • 1.501-2.000 mm
  • 2.001-3.000 mm
  • 3.001-4.000 mm
  • > 4.000 mm
Especifique a média pluviométrica anual em mm (se conhecida):

250,00

Especificações/comentários sobre a pluviosidade:

Short growing period, low rainfall during the growing period, frequent droughts, early and late frosts

Indique o nome da estação meteorológica de referência considerada:

“KazHydroMet” National State Organization

Zona agroclimática
  • Semiárido

Farm “Cherezdanov”, Smirnovo village, Akkayinskii rayon, Northern Kazakhstan oblast: mean annual rainfall, mm - 333,4; mean annual temperature (degrees Celsius) - +1,6;
Farm “Dostyk 06”, Astrahanovka village, Astrahanskyi rayon, Akmola oblast: mean annual rainfall, mm - 319,6; mean annual temperature (degrees Celsius) - +1,6;
Farm “Surayev”, Arshalinsky rayon, Akmola oblast: mean annual rainfall, mm - 312,8; mean annual temperature (degrees Celsius) - +2,4;
Farm “Daryn”, Valikhanovo village, Zharkainsky rayon, Akmola oblast: mean annual rainfall, mm - 253,4; mean annual temperature (degrees Celsius) - +2,5

5.2 Topografia

Encostas em média:
  • Plano (0-2%)
  • Suave ondulado (3-5%)
  • Ondulado (6-10%)
  • Moderadamente ondulado (11-15%)
  • Forte ondulado (16-30%)
  • Montanhoso (31-60%)
  • Escarpado (>60%)
Formas de relevo:
  • Planalto/planície
  • Cumes
  • Encosta de serra
  • Encosta de morro
  • Sopés
  • Fundos de vale
Zona de altitude:
  • 0-100 m acima do nível do mar
  • 101-500 m acima do nível do mar
  • 501-1.000 m acima do nível do mar
  • 1.001-1.500 m acima do nível do mar
  • 1.501-2.000 m acima do nível do mar
  • 2.001-2.500 m acima do nível do mar
  • 2.501-3.000 m acima do nível do mar
  • 3.001-4.000 m acima do nível do mar
  • > 4.000 m acima do nível do mar
Indique se a tecnologia é aplicada especificamente em:
  • Não relevante

5.3 Solos

Profundidade do solo em média:
  • Muito raso (0-20 cm)
  • Raso (21-50 cm)
  • Moderadamente profundo (51-80 cm)
  • Profundo (81-120 cm)
  • Muito profundo (>120 cm)
Textura do solo (solo superficial):
  • Médio (limoso, siltoso)
Textura do solo (>20 cm abaixo da superfície):
  • Médio (limoso, siltoso)
Matéria orgânica do solo superficial:
  • Médio (1-3%)
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:

Soil depth on average: 1 m.

5.4 Disponibilidade e qualidade de água

Lençol freático:

5-50 m

Disponibilidade de água de superfície:

Médio

Qualidade da água (não tratada):

Água potável precária (tratamento necessário)

Water quality refers to:

both ground and surface water

A salinidade da água é um problema?

Não

Ocorre inundação da área?

Não

5.5 Biodiversidade

Diversidade de espécies:
  • Médio
Diversidade de habitat:
  • Médio

5.6 Características dos usuários da terra que utilizam a tecnologia

Sedentário ou nômade:
  • Sedentário
Orientação de mercado do sistema de produção:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • Comercial/mercado
Rendimento não agrícola:
  • Menos de 10% de toda renda
  • 10-50% de toda renda
Nível relativo de riqueza:
  • Média
Indivíduos ou grupos:
  • Empregado (empresa, governo)
Nível de mecanização:
  • Mecanizado/motorizado
Gênero:
  • Mulheres
  • Homens
Idade dos usuários da terra:
  • meia-idade

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

  • < 0,5 ha
  • 0,5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1.000 ha
  • 1.000-10.000 ha
  • > 10.000 ha
É considerado pequena, média ou grande escala (referente ao contexto local)?
  • Média escala

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

Propriedade da terra:
  • Estado
Direitos do uso da terra:
  • Arrendado
Direitos do uso da água:
  • Comunitário (organizado)
Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Sim

Especifique:

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

Comentários:

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 Acesso a serviços e infraestrutura

Saúde:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Educação:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Assistência técnica:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Emprego (p. ex. não agrícola):
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Mercados:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Energia:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Vias e transporte:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Água potável e saneamento:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom
Serviços finais:
  • Pobre
  • Moderado
  • Bom

6. Impactos e declarações finais

6.1 Impactos no local mostrados pela tecnologia

Impactos socioeconômicos

Produção

Produção agrícola

Diminuído
Elevado

Risco de falha de produção

Elevado
Diminuído

Gestão de terra

Impedido
Simplificado
Renda e custos

Despesas com insumos agrícolas

Elevado
Diminuído

Rendimento agrícola

Diminuído
Elevado

Carga de trabalho

Elevado
Diminuído

Impactos socioculturais

Segurança alimentar/auto-suficiência

Reduzido
Melhorado

Conhecimento de gestão sustentável da terra/degradação da terra

Reduzido
Melhorado

Impactos ecológicos

Ciclo hídrico/escoamento

Colheita/recolhimento de água

Reduzido
Melhorado

Escoamento superficial

Elevado
Diminuído

Evaporação

Elevado
Diminuído
Solo

Umidade do solo

Diminuído
Elevado

Perda de solo

Elevado
Diminuído

Ressecamento/selagem do solo

Elevado
Reduzido

Compactação do solo

Elevado
Reduzido

Ciclo e recarga de nutrientes

Diminuído
Elevado

Matéria orgânica do solo/carbono abaixo do solo

Diminuído
Elevado
Biodiversidade: vegetação, animais

Espécies benéficas

Diminuído
Elevado
Clima e redução de riscos de desastre

Impactos da seca

Elevado
Diminuído

Emissão de carbono e gases de efeito estufa

Elevado
Diminuído

6.2 Impactos externos mostrados pela tecnologia

Impacto dos gases de efeito estufa

Elevado
Reduzido

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)

Mudança climática gradual

Mudança climática gradual
Estação do ano increase or decrease Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Temperatura anual increase bem
Temperatura sazonal verão increase bem
Precipitação pluviométrica anual decrease bem
Precipitação pluviométrica sazonal verão decrease bem

Extremos (desastres) relacionados ao clima

Desastres meteorológicos
Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Temporal local bem
Tempestade de neve local bem
Tempestade de areia/tempestade de poeira bem
Desastres climatológicos
Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Seca bem
Desastres hidrológicos
Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Inundação súbita bem

6.4 Análise do custo-benefício

Como os benefícios se comparam aos custos de implantação (do ponto de vista dos usuários da terra)?
Retornos a curto prazo:

neutro/balanceado

Retornos a longo prazo:

positivo

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

ligeiramente positivo

Retornos a longo prazo:

muito positivo

6.5 Adoção da tecnologia

  • 11-50%
Se disponível, determine a quantidade (número de unidades familiares e/ou área abordada):

about 3 mln ha under Conservation Agriculture in Kazakhstan now

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 0-10%
Comentários:

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

6.6 Adaptação

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

Não

6.7 Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades da tecnologia

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
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.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
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 Pontos fracos, desvantagens/riscos da tecnologia e formas de superá-los

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view How can they be overcome?
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.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
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. Referências e links

7.1 Métodos/fontes de informação

  • field visits, field surveys

4 visits, field days

  • interviews with land users

4 interviews with land users

  • interviews with SLM specialists/ experts

2 experts

  • compilation from reports and other existing documentation
When were the data compiled (in the field)?

2012

7.2 Referências às publicações disponíveis

Title, author, year, 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)

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

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

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

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

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

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

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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.

Title, author, year, 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 Links to relevant online information

Title/ 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 General comments

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.

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules