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

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

International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) - Kenya

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

KARI Headquarters (KARI Headquarters) - Kenya

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

Jomo Kenyatta University (Jomo Kenyatta University) - Kenya

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:

The nine maize pits is a type of SLM technology whereby, a planting pits measuring (2*2*2) feet are dug along a contour and maize planted in the pit at a spacing of (30*30) cm. The top soil is mixed with FYM and the spaces in between are left un-ploughed.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Maize pits commonly referred as zai is a traditional land rehabilitation technology “invented” to rehabilitate degraded dry lands and to restore soil fertility to the benefit of farmers living there.They are made on land which is not very permeable so that runoff can be collected. Improvements in the traditional pits by the addition of organic matter (compost) have resulted in dramatic improvements in yield. The planting pits are suitable for semi-arid area like the lower Mbeere District to enable crops to survive dry spells. They are used on a wide variety soil types but most suitable on silt and clay soils where runoff can be generated due to limited permeability.

Purpose of the Technology: Apart from establishment of a nine maize crop stand in one pit, the technology assists in harvesting rain water, conserving the moisture, managing of soil fertility and controlling of weed development. Use of this technique in Mbeere South District have produced higher grain yields, particularly on highly degraded sandy soils. They offers a good potential to both increase the livelihood of the rural population and at the same time, combat desertification.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The process is started in dry season of the year. Holes of 2ft by 2ft and 2ft deep are dug out. Remove the top soil and put it on the uphill side. Remove the subsoil and place it down hill to form a continuous bund from end to end of each row. The top soil is returned into the pit and mixed with animal manure at the rate of 1 debe per hole. Plant 9 maize seeds on the pit at a spacing of 1foot. The compost can be made from rotted cow/sheep dung, leaves, and ashes from wood-fueled stoves.

Natural / human environment: These maize pits are usually constructed on abandoned or unused ground. Thus, crop yields resulting from this practice bring a benefit of 100%.

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

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through land users' innovation

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact

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

Comments:

Major crop: Green grams / Maize
Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Crop water deficiency due to low soil moisture content
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Inadequate water for the crop
Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

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

Comments:

Water supply: Also post-flooding

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• minimal soil disturbance
• integrated soil fertility management
• water harvesting

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: soil management, Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts), poverty / wealth, labour availability
Secondary causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

KSh

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

100.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Land clearing	Before onset of rainfall
2.	Digging of pits	Before onste of rainfall
3.	Buying of seed maize	before onset of rains
4.	Planting of seed maize	just before onset of rain

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	24.0	24.0	100.0
Equipment	Tools	ha	1.0	15.0	15.0	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	ha	1.0	12.0	12.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Manure (FYM)	ha	1.0	50.0	50.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					101.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					1.01

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 1 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Weeding	after 2 months

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 (weeding)	ha	1.0	24.0	24.0	100.0
Equipment	Tools	ha	1.0	15.0	15.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					39.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					0.39

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

It requires high intensity labour due to manual construction.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

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: High
Soil drainage/infiltration: Good
Soil water storage capacity: High

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

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: 10-50 persons/km2

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:

• individual

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

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)

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Comments:

Increase the depth of the pit for high water retention to enable drought tolerance

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

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
There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Prevention of soil erosion.
It is a water harvesting technology.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Food security.
Prevention of excessive evaporation.
Income generation at household level.
Improves ground water recharge.

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?
Encourages pests to stay in the pits

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Labour intensive (construction & maintenance)
In wet seasons, they can be prone to water logging
Prevents machinery movement in the farms

7.1 Methods/ sources of information