1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Pilot Program for Climate Resilience, Tajikistan (WB / PPCR)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

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

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

NCCR North-South (NCCR North-South) - Kyrgyzstan

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Intercropping of wheat in an existing orchard that was established during the Soviet period.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology involves intercropping wheat in an existing apricot orchard, that was established during soviet times to increase farm production, by integrating different resources in an environment protected from soil erosion. The intercropped area is ploughed by tractor. In general, farmers do not practice crop rotation since they usually allocate cereal production to the most fertile field plots of their farm.
Along the trees aligned on contour, a three metre wide grass strip is left uncultivated to control runoff, and to protect the ground from splash erosion. Spacing between rows is 13 metres, which allows unhindered farm operations.
Most orchards in Faizabad Rayon were established during Soviet times. Tree rows were planted close together in order to obtain maximum yields from the orchard monoculture systems. Some of the tree rows were removed, allowing more space for intercropping.

Purpose of the Technology: The technology is applied in existing orchards which generally range between 10-25% in gradient. In existing orchards, intercropping alone is relatively cost intensive. Harvesting two crops at a time increases overall farm production and improves food security since harvests of intercropped food crops are found to be more reliable than those on exposed annual cropland. However, many orchards are still owned by state farms which usually do not practice intercropping. Since management of fruit trees require considerable labour and material inputs (e.g. chemicals for pest/disease control as well as fertilisers) which often cannot be met by farmers, yields of fruit trees have declined after the privatisation of these areas. Furthermore, farmers often lack knowledge of appropriate orchard management techniques and miss opportunities to gradually replace old trees by new seedlings.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agroforestry

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): severe water erosion (rills and gullies) and subsequent fertility decline on cropland and overgrazed pastures

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): fertility decline, soil erosion and washing downslope of seeds before they can sprout

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Intercropped winter wheat and sometimes chickpeas are sown in autumn; flax, alfa alfa, esparzet, and also chickpeas are sown in early spring

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

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

• Yes (Please fill out the questions below with regard to the land use before implementation of the Technology)

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Secondary measures: vegetative measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, mineral (inorganic) fertilizers, contour tillage

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• USD

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	establishment of apricot orchard by state enterprise	established in 1989
2.	acquiring land use rights for existing orchard lands from local authorities
3.	thinning and clearing of tree rows

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	thinning and clearing of tree rows	ha	1.0	6.0	6.0	100.0
Equipment	tools	ha	1.0	25.0	25.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					31.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					31.0

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 0 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	disc ploughing (area for intercropping)	before sowing / annual
2.	sowing (winter wheat)
3.	applying of fertiliser	early spring / each cropping season
4.	harvesting	summer / each cropping season
5.	pruning of fruit trees	autumn/winter /annual
6.	cutting of grass strip	summer /annual
7.	applying manure for fruit trees	winter/early spring /annual
8.	removal of twiggs affected by insects/deseases	spring /weekly

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	sowing and weeding	ha	1.0	18.0	18.0	100.0
Labour	pruning of fruit trees	ha	1.0	45.0	45.0	100.0
Labour	cutting of twiggs affe	ha	1.0	15.0	15.0	100.0
Equipment	machine use	ha	1.0	20.0	20.0	100.0
Plant material	seeds	ha	1.0	30.0	30.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	fertilizer	ha	1.0	50.0	50.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	compost/manure	ha	1.0	40.0	40.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					218.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					218.0

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: tools: saw, sickle, pruning shears, fork, bucket

per hectare (with the described spacing of trees and tree rows)

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The number of trees influences costs considerably, since orchard management is labour and input intensive

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Landforms: Also valley floors

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil fertility: low-high

Soil drainage / infiltration: medium - good

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

5% of the land users are rich and own 15% of the land.
75% of the land users are average wealthy and own 70% of the land (local authorities sometimes need to be bribed in order to acquire land use rights for orchard land).

Off-farm income specification: In general, all farmers (including those applying SWC technologies) are highly dependent on off-farm income, which in most cases is earned in Russia either by themselves or by their relatives.

Market orientation of production system subsistence (self-supply): Only surpluses are sold or exchanged for other goods

Level of mechanization: Ploughing is carried out using a tractor whenever possible, but animal traction also existent.

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

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• state

Land use rights:

• leased

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

NA

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 91-100%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: In general, there is a growing demand for orchard land for intercropping. However, a considerable amount of orchards are still managed by state farms which usually do not maintain intercropping systems.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
two harvests at a time How can they be sustained / enhanced? increase in farm production
good wheat harvests in intercropping systems

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
low costs for establishment (intercropping only)
wheat production with very little soil erosion
intercropping can improve food security of low income families

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
yield of fruit trees insufficient because required inputs are not affordable	gradually replace old trees by new seedlings
Insufficient yields of intercropped plants because of shadow of old/large fruit trees
orchard systems vulnerable to pests, late frost and strong winds

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
productive orchard systems require considerable amounts of recurrent inputs (e.g. chemicals for pest/disease control, fertiliser) which locals often cannot afford	avoiding intercropping of sparsely growing crops in vulnerable intercropping systems; improving ground cover by mulching
in comparison to orchards with an intact grass cover, intercropping of sparcely growing plant species increases the risk of soil erosion
intercropped wheat hinders maintenance activities of fruit trees

7.1 Methods/ sources of information