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

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

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

Incentive Based Local Level Participatory Planning Approach [Ethiopia]

The approach involves, the use of incentives to motivate particpation of communities in the planning and implementation of SWC activities which improve land productivity and income.

• Compiler: Philippe Zahner
• 01/22/2009 midnight

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Activities that help maintain the productive potentials of soils through prevention and reduction of erosion, enhancing of rehabilitation rate by practicing measures such as microbasins, trench, eyebrow terrace, terraces, pitting and plantation of trees.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The SWC technology comprises a combination of measures, which include agronomic, vegetative, structural and management measures. This means that in implementing the SWC technology combination of measures such as contour cultivation, grass strips, soil and stone bunds, area closure and improved grazing are applied in integration to rehabilitate degraded lands and restore their productivity. The purpose is to improve food security by reducing erosion and enhance the productivity of land by planting useful trees and fodder species. Unproductive land is changed to productive land by the practicing of the technology. The SWC technology is continously maintained and improved to meet the standards and qulity such that erosion is minimized. The technology is suitable to degraded and unproductive lands which were abondoned as result of low productivity and were previously under cultivation or grazing land. Closure of the area is followed by vegetative and structural measures to speed up the recovery / regeneration rate.

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

Country:

Ethiopia

Region/ State/ Province:

SNNPR

Further specification of location:

Alaba special woreda

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 60 km2.

Some of the SWC technology areas are well rehabilitated and the remaining sites are partially treated, because these are being newly started sites.

Map

×

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

It is introduced technology.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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):

• Agro-silvopastoralism

Cropland

• Annual cropping
• Perennial (non-woody) cropping
• Tree and shrub cropping

Annual cropping - Specify crops:

• cereals - maize
• cereals - rye
• cereals - sorghum
• legumes and pulses - other

• pepper, teff, chat, haricot beans, wheat

• vetiver, elephant grass

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:

• avocado
• citrus
• coffee, open grown
• mango, mangosteen, guava

• Eucalyptus, sesbania, grevillea, acacia

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 180 Longest growing period from month to month: Apr - Sep Second longest growing period in days: 120 Second longest growing period from month to month: Jun - Sep

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:

• Semi-nomadic pastoralism

Intensive grazing/ fodder production:

• Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing

Forest/ woodlands

Products and services:

• Timber
• Fuelwood
• Fruits and nuts
• Nature conservation/ protection

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Improper landuse, defforestation, overgrazing, lack of action to control erosion.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): lack of awarness, traditional way of ploughing, lack of technolog on SWC

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: open grazing is practiced

Grazingland comments: Nowadays closing a small individual plots and practicing cut and carrying system is being popular among land users.

Plantation forestry: replacing natural forests

Problems / comments regarding forest use: Forest/woodlands are mainly communal, so, replanting forests is undertaken by the community. Individual forests/woodlands are very few and small in size since there is a shortage of land for forests and tree plantation.

Forest products and services: timber, fuelwood, fruits and nuts, nature conservation / protection

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Haricot bean is planted after maize is planted and has allowed some height.

Constraints of infrastructure network (roads, railways, pipe lines, power lines)

Constraints of Stone excavation (quarrying has caused a lott of damage on land.)

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

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• cross-slope measure
• water harvesting

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

• Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
• Wg: gully erosion/ gullying

chemical soil deterioration

• Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)

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:

• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

Comments:

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation, mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

SNNPR

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: increase of infiltration, water harvesting / increase water supply

Secondary technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, improvement of ground cover, increase / maintain water stored in soil, reduction in wind speed, improvement of soil structure, increase in soil fertility

Better crop cover
Material/ species: teff, wheat
Quantity/ density: 10,000,000
Remarks: broad casting

Early planting
Material/ species: maize, sorghum
Quantity/ density: 60,000
Remarks: row planting and broad casting

Relay cropping
Material/ species: maize-haricot bean
Quantity/ density: maize-hari
Remarks: row planting

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: maize and haricot bean
Quantity/ density: 120,000
Remarks: row planting

Contour planting / strip cropping
Material/ species: maize, sorghum
Quantity/ density: 50,000
Remarks: strip cropping

Green manure
Material/ species: legumes
Quantity/ density: 100,000
Remarks: broad casting

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: leaves, cow dung

Mineral (inorganic) fertilizers
Material/ species: DAP, UreaTillag

Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: G : grass
Number of plants per (ha): 10,000,000
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1.5
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.5
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.3
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.25

Aligned: -against wind
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 40000
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.5
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.5

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: F : fruit trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 111
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 6
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 6

In blocks
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 40000

Trees/ shrubs species: sesbania, grevillea, acacia

Fruit trees / shrubs species: mango, avocado, orange

Perennial crops species: coffee, chat

Grass species: vetiver, elephant grass

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 8.00%

Diversion ditch/ drainage
Vertical interval between structures (m): 1
Spacing between structures (m): 50
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.8
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.6
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 80
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.8
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.5
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 80

Terrace: forward sloping
Vertical interval between structures (m): 1
Spacing between structures (m): 50
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 10
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.5
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1

Terrace: backward sloping
Vertical interval between structures (m): 1
Spacing between structures (m): 50
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 10
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.5
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1

Bund/ bank: level
Spacing between structures (m): 40
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.8
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1

Bund/ bank: graded
Spacing between structures (m): 20
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.8
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 20%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is: 8%

Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.

Change of land use type: degraded land to forest land

Major change in timing of activities: structure in dry season, plantation in rainy season.

Other type of management: change of management / intensity level - protection of the closed area by site guards.

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Birr

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

8.6

4.3 Establishment activities

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 60 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

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

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: hoe, shovel, wheel barrow, hammer

The cost is calculated for PD/person days on a hectar basis

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Tools and transport facilities (motorcycles), fuel and food grain.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 1501-2000 m a.s.l. (ranked 1) and 2001-2500 m a.s.l. (1700-2200m a.s.l., ranked 2)
Slopes on average: Gentle (ranked 1) and moderate (ranked 2, about 70% of the land is on a slope of 2-8%)

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 texture: Coarse/light (ranked1) and medium (ranked 2, sandy loam)
Soil fertility: High
Soil drainage/infiltration: Good (well drained)
Soil water storage capacity: Very low (because it is sandy loam soil)

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 200-500 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 3% - 4%
10% of the land users are very rich.
25% of the land users are rich.
40% of the land users are average wealthy.
25% of the land users are poor.
5% of the land users are poor.
Off-farm income specification: Land users who practice SWC measures get better production. Their incomes has increased compared to those who have not applied SWC.
Market orientation of cropland production system: subsistence (self-supply, part of the production is sold at local market), mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Market orientation of grazing land production system: subsistence (self-supply, fodder plant for milk cow), mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Market orientation of forest production system: subsistence (self-supply, tree plantation on individual plots ), mixed (subsistence/ commercial), commercial/market (plantation of a community forests)

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:

• individual

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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):

52000

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

• 11-50%

Comments:

90% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

46800 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: survey results

10% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

5200 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: survey results

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Nowadays land users have better understanding on SWC technologies, so they protect their farm land from erosion with vegetation.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

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

7.1 Methods/ sources of information