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

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Is the cross slope berrier charactrised by contour bunds, cajanus can, pineapples, farm yard manures and grass mulch in banana production.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The contour band stabilized with cajanus cajan and pineapples in the composite manures and trushline application technology is the digging of a 0.6m wide by 0.6m deep along the demarcated contour line, while two rows of cajanus cajan planted along the band spaced at 0.3m and two rows of pineapples at alternating band spaced at 0.3m. The overall purpose of the technology is to reduce soil erosions while increasing soil water infiltration and retaining soil water moisture. The technology is applied perennial cropland in the sub humid climatic zone on the gentle to moderate slope, loam soils with medium soil depth. The technology is done manually using hand hoes and mattock in a mixed production system, land owned individually not titled while the total cost to implement a technology on 0.2ha in the banana field was calculated to be US$ …..

The purpose is to increase land productivity, improve livelihood as well as improved ecosystem and micro climate. This should be attained by improving water use efficiency, soil fertility inprovement to increase crop productivity and generating incomes.

The establishment procedures require the determination of the slope and demarcation of a contour line using a tool known as A-frame. This is done manually during the rainy season. The digging and excavation of the soils is done at the end of harvesting annual crops (bean and maize) using hand hoes manually. The cajanus cajan seeds are sown in two rows along the band and the next band is planted with two rows of pinepples at 0.3m between rows as well as between plants. The shallow ditch measuring 0.6m by 0.6m is excavated at the centre of four banana stools to collect crop residues to decompose and apply them. Old banana stools are up rooted at the end of rain season while measurements and digging of holes done. The spacing is 3.6m by 3.6m for the planted medium variety. The hole measurements is 0.6m width by 0.6m length by 0.3m depth. The farmyard manures are mixed with top soils and covered in the hole for three months before planting. The planting is done before the onset of rainfalls. The dry grass mulch is applied across the slope with a thickness of 0.15m at the onset of rainfalls.
The maintenance procedures require the remove of sedments at the end of rainseason done manually using spades. The trimming of cajanus cajan and pineapples are done manually during the harvesting season. Desuckering and detrushing of banana plants are done twice after harvesting annual crops while grass mulch followed.

Average annual rainfall (750 to 1,000)mm, Altitude (m a.s.l.) (1,000 -1,500)m Landform is hill slope to foot slope, Soil depth (>20 cm) shallow about 20%, (20-50cm) medium about 60% and (50-80cm) deep about 20%, Soil water storage capacity: medium, Soil texture: medium (loam), Soil fertility: low, Topsoil organic matter: medium (1-3%) and Soil drainage/infiltration: medium. Cropland per household is 2-5 ha, Land user are Individual / household, Small scale land users, common / average land users, men and women. Population density: 200-500 persons/km2, Annual population growth: < 0.5%, Land ownership: individual, not titled Land use rights: individual, Water use rights: open access (unorganised) Relative level of wealth: rich, which represents 5% of the land users; 21% of the total area is owned by rich land users average, which represents 64% of the land users; 64% of the total area is owned by average land users poor, which represents 21% of the land users; 5% of the total area is owned by poor land users Market orientation: mixed (subsistence and commercial) Mechanization: manual labour

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:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The technology was introduced in 2012 using FFS metodology (at host farmer sites) and results demonstration (at FEC) as a choice of 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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The major land use problem relatrd to soil, water and vegetation in the area without conservation was loss of soil water moisture, reduced soil nutrients and soil erosion.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): The major land use problem related to soil, water and vegetation without conservation was declining soil productivity.

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

• cross-slope measure

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Type of agronomic measures: mulching, legume inter-planting, manure / compost / residues
Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour, aligned: -linear

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: soil management (Cultivation along the slope), disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff) (cultivation along the slope), change of seasonal rainfall (un determined rainfall parterns), droughts (the area normally experiences a long dry spell of about 290 days), population pressure (croping along the slope and natural forests), poverty / wealth (Land user can not afford to invest in land conservation), education, access to knowledge and support services (lInadequate staffing to diseminate technology massages.), governance / institutional (weak environmental law inforcements and lack of community sensitization..)

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

TShs.

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

1700.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Ploughung	once at the end of short rainfals
2.	Harrowing	Mid of dry spel
3.	Spacing and demarcating holes	mid of dry spel
4.	Digging holes	mid of dry spel
5.	mixing farm yard manures	mid of dry spel
6.	Planting banana suckers	lat dry spale
7.	Sowing cajanus cajan	on set of long rainfals
8.	Planting pinepples	on sertof long rainfals
9.	To demarcate contour line	the end of short rainfall
10.	To dig the furrow	at the end of dry spel

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	labour	ha	1.0	1696.85	1696.85
Equipment	tools	ha	1.0	4.71	4.71	100.0
Plant material	seedlings	ha	1.0	433.89	433.89
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					2135.45
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					1.26

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	weeding	Twice in the midle of rainfals
2.	Desuckering	Twice in the midle of rainfals
3.	Detrushing	Twice in the middle rainfals
4.	Mulching	once at the end of dry spel
5.	Banana weevils trapping	routenely
6.	manures appliacation	at the end od dry spel
7.	Sowing beans	once in the long rainfals
8.	To prune cajanus cajan	routenly
9.	To remove soil sediment	twice at the end of raifals

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	labour	ha	1.0	205.88	205.88	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					205.88
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					0.12

Comments:

The costs for agronomic measures calculated per 0.2 hectors the converted to per hectare. The costs for vegetative calculated per number of plants in 0.2 ha the converted per hectare and the costs for structural measures calculated per total length of structures foun in 0.2 ha then converted per hectare,

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The most determinate factors are labour light indicating the technology to be labour intensive in nature.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

5.3 Soils

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
Population density: 200-500 persons/km2
Annual population growth: < 0.5%
Relative level of wealth: rich, average, poor
5% of the land users are rich and own 21% of the land.
64% of the land users are average wealthy and own 64% of the land.
21% of the land users are poor and own 5% of the land.
Off-farm income specification: Increased crop productivity from the use of technology has revealed excess crop produce for sale and sustain the house hold solely fro farm income.

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:

• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

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	not known

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	not well

Comments:

The technology could be modified by introducing the water spillways in heavy rainfalls and collect the water in reservor to be used during the dry spells.

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:

The cumulative accrues for three years should cover the establishment costs and while for the long period there will be no further establishments.
The maintenance costs for the first three years is greater than the returns while in the long run the increased productivity should overdue the maintenance costs.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

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

• 51-90%

Comments:

12% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
25 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
Only 3 host farners out of 25 total group members were supplied of certified banana suckers and grass mulch.
88% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
25 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
23 group members were adopted with modification the technology at there own full costs.
There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology. The adoption with modification is high, but these modification tends to diverge from the SaLM though productivity is attained.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Increased land productivity: The furrow has increased water infiltration and reduced blue water evaporation.Cajanus cajan has stabilised the soil on the riser while improving nutrient cycling. Certified banana suckers has reduced production failure. micro climate
Improved livelihood: Increased banana productivity form 4 tones per hectare to 9 tones per hectare should ensure food security as well as income.
Improved ecosystem: prevent, mitigate and rehabilitate degradation
The technology is easy to learn and apply.

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?
Increased labour constraints to dig and excavate the furrow.	Reduce out migration of labour.
Increased farm input costs to purchase certified banana suckers and cajanus cajan seeds.	Establish banana nursries at local levels.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information