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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 17, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Book project: where the land is greener - Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide (where the land is greener)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 17, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Book project: where the land is greener - Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide (where the land is greener)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 313, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CSKHPKV Palampur (CSKHPKV Palampur) - India', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 313, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CSKHPKV Palampur (CSKHPKV Palampur) - India', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 313, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CSKHPKV Palampur (CSKHPKV Palampur) - India', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 313, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CSKHPKV Palampur (CSKHPKV Palampur) - India', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 313, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CSKHPKV Palampur (CSKHPKV Palampur) - India', 'template': 'raw'}

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:

Integration of vegetative and structural measures for landslip, stream bank and gully stabilisation on hillsides.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

A combination of measures, implemented by a group of neighbouring families, is used to address landslips, gully formation and stream bank erosion problems in the middle hills of Nepal. All these processes affect the stability of adjacent agricultural land and cause problems downstream. Small-scale farming is dominant in the area surrounding the treated land - which theoretically belongs to the government but is used by these families.
This pilot technological package is proving suitable in Nepal for steep/very steep slopes under subhumid climates within an altitudinal range of 1,000-1,500 m a.s.l. This type of intervention, combined with the active involvement of stakeholders (who contribute three quarters of the cost), was recently introduced to Nepal under a watershed management programme, co-funded by the European Commission (see related approach ‘Integrated watershed management’).
Initially, ditches with bunds on the lower side are constructed along the contour. Within the gullies and along the stream banks, cement bags (filled with cement, brick chips, sand and/or earth) are placed to avoid deepening of the channel. Wattle fences, made from woven bamboo are also used as checks in the gullies. These structures are complemented by vegetative measures: Nepalese alder (Alnus nepalensis), bamboo (Dendrocalamus sp.), cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum), and broom grass (Thyosonaelana maxima) are planted. These species establish quickly in degraded sites and also control erosion, stabilise land and serve as cash crops, and for fodder, fuelwood and timber. Alder (locally called utis) is a nitrogen-fixing multipurpose tree which helps restore soil fertility.
Farmers can get economic benefits within a few years from these plants. Another advantage of this package is that the vegetative resources needed are locally available and cheap. Furthermore farmers already know how to propagate them. Maintenance costs are negligible. Once established, the stabilised and revegetated sites provide improved environments for birds and insects – thus favouring biodiversity - and they help protect natural springs. In this case study, the economic returns from the cash crops mainly go to one family. Another few families also utilise this site, extracting common products (fodder, litter, timber) for domestic use. Additionally, the location is regularly used as an unofficial demonstration site, being visited by various people (farmers, SWC specialists) interested in the technology. This represents an indirect benefit to a larger number of people and strengthens institutions at household and community levels.

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:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• 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):

• Silvo-pastoralism

Comments:

Major cash crop: Nepalese Alder (Alnus nepalensis), Bamboo (Dendroc) and broom grass (Thysanolaena maxima)

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): - concentrated runoff from upstream agricultural areas
- landslides, gullies and stream bank erosion
- gullies back-cutting into fertile agricultural land and threatening irrigation canals and homesteads

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Landslide and gully erosion due to poor vegetative cover (steepness and lack of effective drainage/ diversion system).

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Mixed: Ma: Agro-silvopastoralism

Constraints of wastelands (degraded shrubland) (before SWC) (degraded , no annual crops, occasionally grazed)

Number of growing seasons per year: 2
Longest growing period in days: 180 Longest growing period from month to month: Jun - Nov

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
• ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), education, access to knowledge and support services (lack of knowledge)

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:

Secondary goals: rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

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

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• USD

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Preparing site for implementation of vegetative measures	June
2.	Planting of alder (Alnus nepalensis,), cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum),	July - August
3.	Watering of new plants using buckets	Mar- May (1st year)
4.	Application of farmyard manure at time of planting	Time of planting and every December
5.	Weeding	January
6.	Earthing up new plants with soil	January
7.	Construction of contour bunds and ditches	January–April
8.	Stabilisation of slopes using bamboo wattle fences, and gullies using the check dams
9.	Gully stabilisation as walls of cement bags are placed across the gullies and along stream banks	June
10.	Preparing the site for planting	June

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	Stabilisation of gully and vegetative measures	Persons/day	1567.0	1.35	2115.45	75.0
Equipment	Tools	ha	1.0	55.0	55.0	100.0
Equipment	Empty cement bags	pieces	600.0	0.0166666	10.0
Plant material	Bamboo cuttings	pieces	600.0	0.9416666	565.0	50.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Compost / manure	ha	1.0	10.0	10.0	10.0
Construction material	Cement bags filled	pieces	30.0	4.166666	125.0
Construction material	Alder saplings	pieces	2500.0	0.016	40.0	100.0
Construction material	Seedlings cardamon	pieces	400.0	0.0125	5.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					2925.45
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					2925.45

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

By different stakeholders

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Apply farmyard manure	January /1
2.	Weed	January /1
3.	Prepare land for further planting of large cardamom and broom grass	March-April /1
4.	Thin cardamom, bamboo, alder, broom grass with a knife:	May,June /1
5.	Replant cardamom, broom grass, bamboo that did not establish	June,July /1
6.	Earth up	Aug-Sep and January /1
7.	Prune alders	December.,January /1

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	Maintaining plants	Persons/day	41.0	1.35	55.35	100.0
Equipment	Tools	ha	1.0	10.0	10.0	100.0
Plant material	Compost / manure	ha	1.0	5.0	5.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					70.35
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					70.35

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: Activities are carried out manually using local and traditional tools:

The costs (per ha) are calculated for the entire SWC site (consisting of 1.4 ha) including all establishment and maintenance inputs. Labour costs: information based on oral information by farmer. Estimate was approx. 3 people per working day over 2 years.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

labour is the major input.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Slopes on average: Also hilly

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 is low (sandy) - medium (loam)

Soil drainage / infiltration is medium

Soil water storage capacity is low

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: 2% - 3%

2% of the land users are very rich and own 40% of the land.
5% of the land users are rich and own 30% of the land.
85% of the land users are average wealthy and own 15% of the land.
3% of the land users are poor and own 10% of the land.
3% of the land users are poor and own 5% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: Off-farm activities: occasionally teaching at farmer's school; selling non-timber forest products on the market; some people workin markets/shops/onconstruction, sites, and similar ..

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:

• open access (unorganized)

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Other ecological impacts

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	not 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	not 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)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• > 50%

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

38 households in an area of 1.4 ha

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

• 51-90%

Comments:

47% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

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

Comments on acceptance with external material support: survey results

53% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

20 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: estimates by the authors, based on the past trends of adoption.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Family members have learnt the technology. it is easy to replicate. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Provide training and schooling to farmers to spread this information to others (eg through village initiatives supported by government).
Better environment, increased biodiversity How can they be sustained / enhanced? As above
Soil and water conservation How can they be sustained / enhanced? As above
Fresh products, health benefits from cardamom How can they be sustained / enhanced? As above
Income generation from cash cropping of cardamom, bamboo, broom grass) How can they be sustained / enhanced? As above

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The technology requires resources which are largely locally available and of low costs. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Raise awareness that landslide threatened stream banks and steep slops can be protected using local resources.
Technology addresses livelihood constraints How can they be sustained / enhanced? Raise awareness that the technology is profitable.

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?
The technology is adopted more by better ressourced farmers	Government programmes should seek to involve poor farmers in land development with incentives for adopting recommennded technologies
Establishment costs are high	Subsidise the cost (extension service, projects), reduce establishment costs by designing alternative structural measures without use of cement.
Socio-economic conflicts can arise when the value of land is raised	Take equity issues into account when implementing such a programme, and spread the benefits.
Establishment is very labour intensive.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

IBIWMP (2003) Engineering Field Manual. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Programme,Bagmati Integrated Watershed Management

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Howell, J. (ed) (1999) Roadside Bio-engineering Reference Manual. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, Department of Roads