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)

DESIRE (EU-DES!RE)

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

Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias y Forestales (IIAF) - Mexico

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

Institut de recherche pour le développement IRD (Institut de recherche pour le développement IRD) - France

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

SECRETARÍA DE MEDIO AMBIENTE Y RECURSOS NATURALES (SECRETARÍA DE MEDIO AMBIENTE Y RECURSOS NATURALES) - Mexico

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

Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo (UMSNH) - Mexico

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)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Agave forestry land reclamation system with native agaves, trees, shrubs and grasses planted through participatory action for a sustainable production of mezcal and other products in order to generate high incomes for farmers.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Rehabilitation of degraded land is achieved using native agave (Agave inaequidens), trees and/or fruit trees, shrubs and grasses to create, over the medium-term (7-10 years), sustainable production of a traditional alcoholic drink (mezcal) made from agave and/or cosmetic and medicinal products, and/or fibres and/or fodder for cattle and/or wood. Between the agave plants, native vegetation is managed or planted for use as food, fodder and/or medicinal products. Depending on the slope and the level of land degradation, continuous planted rows of agave provide a ’green’ barrier that controls soil erosion and runoff.

Purpose of the Technology: The main purpose is to achieve sustainable land rehabilitation while generating a high income for the farmer. This allows reducing the amount of livestock and overgrazing, which is the main cause of soil erosion in this region. The production of mezcal gives local farmers high incomes. Trees, shrubs and grasses for medicinal uses, food, and fodder are complements of agave production and are processed mainly by women, while agave harvesting is a male activity. As it is very attractive financially, farmers stay in the communities instead of emigrating to cities or abroad. Biodiversity is preserved and increased using native plants (agaves, trees, shrubs, grasses). These plant associations are effective at controlling plant pests and diseases. Turning eroded into productive soil sequesters carbon and increases water availability as a result of the new soil cover.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Unlike most agave, Agave inaequidens reproduces from seed, which requires harvesting the seeds from native plants in the fields. One plant generates 80,000 seeds with a 90% success rate of germination, which is enough to cover 25 ha of agave forestry plantations set up to control soil erosion. After harvesting seeds from native agaves, trees and shrubs, seedlings and small plants are raised in a greenhouse and nursery managed by the owners and tenants of the land in the first year. At the beginning of the rainy season, these are planted in plots protected from cattle grazing for at least the first two years after planting. The harvesting activity for trees, shrubs and grasses is done annually, but for the agaves only once every 7 to 12 years depending on the degree of soil degradation. Some months before harvesting, the flower from the stem has to be cut. The leaves are then cut and left in the plot while the 50 kg heart of the agave (“piña”) is removed. Mezcal is produced from the heart and requires an average of three weeks and at least two men to process 25 agave plants (1.5 tonnes), which produces about 300 litres of mezcal.

Natural / human environment: Poverty levels in the area are medium to high and the income from agriculture accounts for only 10 to 20% of the total family budget. People, therefore, do not have time to install soil erosion protection systems in the fields. Cattle graze freely everywhere and the number of animals is increasing annually, which also increases soil erosion. Locals know how to produce mezcal, but they prefer to buy it from other people who take wild plants from their lands to process them. The proximity of the site to the Michoacán of Ocampo state capital and the recognition of the designation of origin for mezcal by the authorities will enhance its value for future production.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Comments (type of project, etc.):

10 years ago, at Titzio, close to Cointzio basin, A. Martinez developped the culture of a wild native agave (Agave Cupreata) for alcohol production which was done traditionnaly for local consumming. We are following this project and objectives, but we are improving it for land remediation and soil erosion control too with a new species of native Agave (A. inaequidens)

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• create beneficial economic impact

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Mainly overgrazing due to uncontrolled grazing by cattle.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Soil erosion by water due to the storms and improper land use.

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: Yes

Forest products and services: timber, fuelwood, grazing / browsing, other forest products / uses (honey, medical, etc.), nature conservation / protection

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Mixed: Mf: Agroforestry
Livestock density: 1-10 LU /km2

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

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• cross-slope measure
• improved plant varieties/ animal breeds

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Secondary measures: agronomic measures, management measures

Type of agronomic measures: better crop cover, mixed cropping / intercropping, contour planting / strip cropping, cover cropping, retaining more vegetation cover, breaking compacted topsoil, contour ridging, breaking compacted subsoil

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Pu: loss of bio-productive function due to other activities, Bq: quantity / biomass decline, Hs: change in quantity of surface water

Main causes of degradation: soil management (System of one year culture/one year fallow with cattle), overgrazing (THE real cause of soil erosion here), poverty / wealth (Cattle is used as a "bank on 4 feet")

Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub), deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use (Untill 30 years ago, some wood was used for carbon used for cooking), population pressure

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

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

mexican pesos

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

13.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Selection and collect Agave and tree seeds	1 week
2.	Building of greenhouses incl. soil and organic matter	1 month
3.	Fencing of greenhouses with barbed wire, poles and nails (0.5 ha
4.	Seeding & maintaining in greenhouses	3 monthes
5.	Installation of a nursery for agaves and trees and transplantation of seedlings in plastic bags	2 weeks
6.	Plant care and maintaining in nursery (9 months)	9 monthes
7.	Transportation of plants in plastic bags
8.	Plantation of plants (agaves and trees)

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	Building of greenhouses	persons/day	21.0	523.8095	11000.0
Labour	Seeding & maintaining in greenhouses	persons/3 months	2.0	5000.0	10000.0
Labour	Installation of a nursery for agaves and trees	persons/day	14.0	1071.4285	15000.0
Labour	Plant care and maintaining in nursery	persons/9months	2.0	15000.0	30000.0
Plant material	Selection and collect Agave and tree seeds	plants	5.0	100.0	500.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Materials for plant care	months	9.0	2777.7777777	25000.0
Construction material	Materials for greenhouse	trees	60000.0	0.056666666	3400.0
Construction material	Materials for greenhouse	agave	200000.0	0.035	7000.0
Construction material	Materials for fences	m	1500.0	2.4	3600.0
Construction material	Materials for nurserys	trees	60000.0	1.5	90000.0
Construction material	Materials for nurserys	agaves	200000.0	0.2	40000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					235500.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					18115.38

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Cleaning around plants to give them space the first 3 years (For 1 person 10 days)	1 time/year
2.	Cutting the scape before the harvest (For 1 person 15 days)	1 time in agave life (between 7-14 years)
3.	Weeding around plants to give them space during the first 3 years (10 person days)	1 time/year
4.	Cutting the stalk before the harvest (15 person days)	1 Agavelife time (7 to 14 years old)
5.	Replanting of agaves after 7 to 14 years (restarting of a new cycle of production, see establishment activities)

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	Weeding around plants	persons/day	10.0	160.0	1600.0	10.0
Labour	Cutting the stalk before the harvest	persons/day	15.0	150.0	2250.0	10.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					3850.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					296.15

Comments:

Calculations are for the plantation of 200,000 plants (agaves and trees) which correspond to the numbers of plants for 100 ha in the agave forestry example presented here. The main portion of these plants is planted by the community on the own land; the rest is given or sold to other communities or private people. The lifetime of the greenhouse, nursery and fencing installations are around 10 years.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The most important factors determining the costs are: 1) the materials to build a greenhouse and the personal to take care of young plants; 2) the difficulties to make holes in the indurated soils, which takes time and efforts; and 3) the distance between the nursery and the field requires time and efforts (truck carrying the plants).

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Slopes on average: Also steep, very steep and moderate

Altitudinal zone (2000-2500 m a.s.l.) : The Agave inaequidens grows is this conditions but other spieces of Agaves grow in other agroclimatic conditions

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 depth on average: For Agaves and herbaceous no problems, for trees much more difficult

Soil texture (topsoil): For Agaves, trees and herbaceous no problems

Soil fertility is very low - medium: For Agaves, trees and herbaceous no problems

Soil drainage / infiltration is medium - poor: For Agaves and herbaceous no problems, but some difficulties for some tree species

Soil water storage capacity is very low - medium: For Agaves and herbaceous no problems, but some difficulties for some tree species

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Ground water table: Also > 50 m and for Agaves, trees and herbaceous no problems

Availability of surface water: Also poor/ none and for Agaves and herbaceous no problems, but some difficulties for some tree species

Water quality (untreated): Also unusable

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Use of native species

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Difference in the involvement of women and men: Men for hard works: digging holes during the plantation and carrying plants during the harvest
Women and men, do the rest of the activities

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 1% - 2%

Relative level of wealth: average, poor, very poor

34% of the land users are average wealthy.
33% of the land users are poor.
33% of the land users are poor.

Off-farm income specification: off farm incomes represent between 80 to 90% of the annual incomes! This money is obtain through an "external" job, business, trade, or by money send by family from the USA

Market orientation of production system: 90% commercial but some plants (fruit trees, some herbaceus) can be consummed.

Level of mechanization: Manual labour for seed collect, greenhouse, digging holes, plantation, cleaning and harvesting and in some case, tractor can pass to make sub soiling for the plantation of Agave lines to control soil erosion.

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:

• communal/ village
• individual, titled

• ejido

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

• ejido

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

• ejido

Comments:

"ejido" is the community organisation in Mexico: land belongs to the state but it is managed by the community. Some areas can be used by everybody; others are assigned to the land user families.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

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

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	well
local windstorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	well

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)?

Comments:

That is why, state institutions fund the installations of this system meanwhile the production did not start. After that, benefits generated will be enough to motivate people to increase by themselves, the surface to remediate, without economical helps.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 1-10%

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

50 households covering 10 percent of the stated area

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

• 0-10%

Comments:

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

Comments on acceptance with external material support: The program just start in 2010, so it is too early to reduce the experience at few hectares!
As the land users belongs to the same comunity ("ejido"), formally, all the inhabitants are involved in some way by this experience

Comments on spontaneous adoption: As the program just started in 2010, it is impossible to have an exact overview of the results now (end of 2011). As the land users belong to the same community ("ejido"), formally, all the inhabitants are involved in some way

There is a strong trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: It is too early to identify an adoption trend.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Remediation of degraded land turning it to a sustainable production generating very high incomes in the medium term How can they be sustained / enhanced? life will change drastically and not necessarily for the better. Transparency and communication regarding benefits and land use are necessary.
Project done in a participative way where different kind of stakeholders are involved: administrations, politics, scientists and people. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Maintain workshops dynamic between stakeholders, present results to other authorities and forum
Low-cost project but need to be funded and supported with technical and institutional advice to initiate the first cycle of the project. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Farmers can start to produce their mezcal from the wild agaves to sell them to wholesalers and use this money to pay for the project.
As a result of the economical benefits, young people will stay in the communities. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Involve the young to guarantee the future: develop the marketing, the diversification of the products, the quality of production, etc.
It will hopefully reduce the number of cattle, which are the main cause of soil erosion, as farmers lose interest in cattle raising. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Authorities need to monitor this and inform the farmers about the ecological impact of too much free cattle grazing.

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Obligation to find external funds to pay the first steps of the system (greenhouse, planting, etc.) due to the lack of incomes amongst farmers.	Involve all stakeholders in the project
Be sure that alcohol production will not be consummed in excess in the community	Control of the volume of the production, and the sufficiently high selling price should avoid "losing" the production at local scale
Risk that the benefits will be captured by few people	Transparency and stakeholder communication in accounting for the benefits
Marketing and selling the products	Authorities help the farmers to contact sellers. The formation of communities of producers, leading to products conforming to regulations that maintain good quality and provide certification.
Owing to the high incomes, life will change drastically and not necessarily for the better.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Colunga-García Marín P., D. Zizumbo-Villareal, J.T. Martínez. 2007. Tradiciones en el aprovechamiento de los agaves mexicanos: una aportación a la protección legal y conservación de su diversidad biológica y cultural. In: En lo Ancestral hay Futuro: del Tequila, los Mezcales y otros Agaves. P. Colunga-GarcíaMarín, L. Eguiarte, A. Larqué, D. Zizumbo-Villarreal (eds). CICY-CONACYT-CONABIO-SEMARNAT-INE. México D.F., pp. 85-112.

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

DESIRE project Mexico partner (IRD 22)

URL:

http://www.desire-project.eu/