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)

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

A faster and more effective way to produce high quality compost in large quantities by surface composting using dry and green farm biomass piled in a heap.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Biodynamic denotes a method of organic farming that emphasizes a holistic understanding of the interrelationships between soil, plants, and animals in a self-sustaining system. It excludes the use of artificial chemicals and stresses the importance of integrating farm animals, the cultivation of crops, and caring for the land. Fermented herbal and mineral preparations are used as compost additives and field sprays.

Purpose of the Technology: Biodynamic composting is an inexpensive means of producing a large amount of compost within a relatively short time compared to other methods. It is ideal for farmers who require large amounts of compost, such as for orchards; or when several households get together to produce and share compost. This type of composting also helps to store soil carbon, assists irrigation practices that keep fields alternatively moist and dry, works to decrease the number of soil pests, and reduces methane emission. This practice not only enhances agricultural production as an on-site benefit to the land users but also contributes to the off-site benefits enjoyed by downstream land users, since it helps to reduce sedimentation and increases water availability.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The biodynamic compost is prepared as a surface heap rather than in a traditional pit. The heap is built on a flat, dry site away from shade trees and other elements that would promote water logging. The farmer marks out a rectangular plot of land according to his needs and places a set of logs or PVC pipes lengthwise in the middle of the rectangle to facilitate air circulation and help aerate the pile. Alternating layers of dry and green biomass are added on top. Rock phosphate and crushed slaked lime are added to the middle layers to enhance decomposition and to supplement the mineral content. Once the layering is complete, the pile is sealed using a paste made from soil and cow dung. Over the ensuing two months, the pile is watered weekly (through holes made in the plaster layer which are then resealed) and is monitored; any cracks that appear in the external plaster are sealed. At the end of this time, the compost is tested to check if it is ready by taking samples from a few different locations in the heap. When a crushed sample smells like forest soil, it indicates that the degradation is 80% complete and that the compost is ready to use.

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:

• during experiments/ research

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

• Access to fertilizer

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

Cropland

• Annual cropping

Forest/ woodlands

Products and services:

• Fuelwood

• fodder

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Crop productivity is limited by poor soil fertility, intense cropping, and a scarcity of irrigation water. Farmers in the hills notice a marked decrease in the health of their crops and degraded soil conditions when chemical fertilizers are overused. Biodynamic composting is a low input response to this problem.

Forest products and services: fuelwood

Other forest products and services: fodder

Constraints of Scrubland

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated soil fertility management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

management measures

• M5: Control/ change of species composition

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

chemical soil deterioration

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

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Layering of the different materials in a biodynamic compost heap

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate (technicians as well)

Main technical functions: increase in organic matter, Increase Soil fertility and Productivity, Improve Physical condition of the soil

Secondary technical functions: increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, Improve the physical properties of the soil

Other type of management: Improve Compost Quality

Author:

Layering of the different materials in a biodynamic compost heap

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology unit

other/ national currency (specify):

NPR

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

71.0

4.3 Establishment activities

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

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

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

All costs and amounts are rough estimates by the technicians and authors. Exchange rate USD 1 = NPR 71 in May 2011. This was a demonstration project conducted by ICIMOD.

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 is medium

Soil drainage / infiltration is poor

Soil water storage capacity is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Water quality (untreated): Also good drinking water

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

695 species of flora and 230 species of fauna have been documented within the Park's 30 ha area

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 persons/km2

(Neighbouring communities are poor).

Off-farm income specification: >50% of all households around the demonstration site have off-farm income

Market orientation of production system: In the vicinity of the demonstration site

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

• government

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

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

Soil

Other ecological impacts

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)?

Comments:

The land user enjoys both short and long-term benefits; in the short term there is a reduced need for costly chemical/mineral fertilizers and in the long term the health of the soil improves. Locally available dry and green biomass can be used for making biodynamic compost. The only extra costs arise from the need for lime, rock phosphate, and labour.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

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

Experiment

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

• 0-10%

Comments:

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: The biodynamic composting technique found a high rate of acceptance with orchard and vegetable farmers. ICIMOD provided farmers from the Godavari and Bishankhunarayan Village Development Committee areas with training on biodynamic composting. The farmers who need a large amount of compost, such as those who have orchards, have adopted the technique and are now producing the compost themselves.

Drivers for adoption:
• The technology is simple and inexpensive; it can be implemented using local materials.
• The biodynamic method is faster and produces more compost than traditional methods.
• The conditions promote complete decomposition and help to reduce the incidence of soil pests.

Constraints
• There is some initial investment cost in terms of the labour needed to collect biomass/soil and to construct the heap.
• This composting method is limited to farmers who keep livestock because fresh cow dung is needed.

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

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Biodynamic farming and compost preparation, Diver, S, 1999