Technologies

Plantation forestière [Morocco]

Reboisement

technologies_3232 - Morocco

Completeness: 84%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:
Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling out Sustainable Land Management (GEF-FAO / DS-SLM)
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Royaume du Maroc, Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte Contre la Désertification (Royaume du Maroc) - Morocco

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

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Il s'agit de planter des jeunes plants d'espèces forestières locales (arganier) mais aussi des espèces adaptées aux conditions écologiques concernées (exemple Pinus halepensis).

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Augmentation de la densité des peuplements d'arganier ouverts et dégradés par des jeunes plants issus de pépinière forestière.
les principales opérations :
- Ouverture de potets de 60*60*60cm à raison de 200 plants/ha.
- Rebouchage des troues.
- Plantation des plants.
- Arrosage (15 fois aux besoins).
- Regarnis la deuxième année.
- Désherbage / binage.
- Compensation du droit de parcours jusqu'à la défensabilité des plants (10 à 12 ans).

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

Country:

Morocco

Region/ State/ Province:

Région Souss Massa, Commune d'Amskroud

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 10-100 km2

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2015

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:
  • as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)
  • through projects/ external interventions
  • Convention HCEFLCD-ANDZOA
Comments (type of project, etc.):

Projets décinnaux de reconstitution des forêts menés par l'état.
Programme de reconstitutions des formations autochtones à base d’arganier dans le cadre du contrat programme DREFLCD-SO/HCEFLCD.

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • improve production
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact

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

Forest/ woodlands

Forest/ woodlands

  • Tree plantation, afforestation
Tree plantation, afforestation: Specify origin and composition of species:
  • Monoculture local variety
Products and services:
  • Grazing/ browsing
Comments:

Les périmètres de reboisement sont interdits à tout usage.

Number of growing seasons per year: 1

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

  • natural and semi-natural forest management
  • forest plantation management
  • improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

vegetative measures

vegetative measures

  • V1: Tree and shrub cover
structural measures

structural measures

  • S6: Walls, barriers, palisades, fences
management measures

management measures

  • M1: Change of land use type

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
Comments:

Surpâturage, surexploitation des ressources ligneuses.

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

- Potes de : 60*60*60 cm
- Densité 200 plants/ha
- Plants de 5 à 7 mois en pépinière regarnis après la première année.
- Entretien des plants (déserbage).
- Arrosages (jusqu'à 15 fois).

Author:

Qarro Mohamed

Date:

01/07/2017

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:
  • per Technology area
Indicate size and area unit:

100 ha

If using a local area unit, indicate conversion factor to one hectare (e.g. 1 ha = 2.47 acres): 1 ha =:

1 hectare

Specify currency used for cost calculations:
  • USD
If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

9.0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

70 dh

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Clôture Septembre
2. Ouverture des potes Octobre
3. Rebouchage des trous et compost Novembre
4. Acheminement des plants Novembre
5. Plantations Novembre/Décembre
6. Regarnis
7. Entretiens des plants
8. Arrosages

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 Ouverture des potets potet 20000.0 1.0 20000.0
Labour Rebouchage des plantations potet 20000.0 1.0 20000.0
Equipment Clôture ml 160.0 1000.0 160000.0
Plant material Acheminement des plants Plant 20000.0 0.1 2000.0
Plant material Regarnis Plan 5000.0 0.1 500.0
Other Arrosage Plant 20000.0 3.0 60000.0
Other Entretiens Plan 20000.0 0.1 2000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 264500.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 29388.89
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

L'état.

Comments:

La technologie totalement prise complétement par l'état.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Arrosage (durant 2 ans) Juillet - Août - Septembre
2. Binage et désherbage (durant 2 ans) Mars - Avril
3. Regamis Février à septembre durant la 2ème année

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 Compensation de la mise en défens ha 100.0 25.0 2500.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 2500.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 277.78
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

L'état.

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

150.00

Agro-climatic zone
  • arid

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:
  • not relevant

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

> 50 m

Availability of surface water:

medium

Water quality (untreated):

for agricultural use only (irrigation)

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • low
Habitat diversity:
  • low

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Sedentary or nomadic:
  • Sedentary
Market orientation of production system:
  • subsistence (self-supply)
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • poor
Individuals or groups:
  • groups/ community
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
Gender:
  • men
Age of land users:
  • youth
  • middle-aged
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

La technologie exclue actuellement les utilisations des terres habituelles jusqu'à la défensabilité.

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

  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • medium-scale
Comments:

L'utilisation de l'espace est communae pour la communauté usagère.

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

Land ownership:
  • state
Land use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)
Water use rights:
  • communal (organized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

fodder production

decreased
increased

fodder quality

decreased
increased

wood production

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Attendre la réussite de la technologie.

forest/ woodland quality

decreased
increased

non-wood forest production

decreased
increased

land management

hindered
simplified
Water availability and quality

drinking water availability

decreased
increased

drinking water quality

decreased
increased

water availability for livestock

decreased
increased

water quality for livestock

decreased
increased
Income and costs

diversity of income sources

decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts

land use/ water rights

worsened
improved

community institutions

weakened
strengthened

national institutions

weakened
strengthened

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved

conflict mitigation

worsened
improved

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

Importante

Quantity after SLM:

Faible

Comments/ specify:

Avec la réusssite de la plantation.

groundwater table/ aquifer

lowered
recharge

evaporation

increased
decreased
Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased

soil cover

reduced
improved
Quantity before SLM:

Claire

Quantity after SLM:

Améliorée

Comments/ specify:

Au fur et à mesure avec l'age des plants.

soil loss

increased
decreased

soil crusting/ sealing

increased
reduced

soil compaction

increased
reduced

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Amélioration progressive.

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Vegetation cover

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Amélioration progressive.

biomass/ above ground C

decreased
increased

plant diversity

decreased
increased
Climate and disaster risk reduction

flood impacts

increased
decreased

drought impacts

increased
decreased

impacts of cyclones, rain storms

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Réduit avec le couvert végétal.

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases

increased
decreased

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

water availability

decreased
increased

downstream flooding

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

Réduit avec le couvert végétal.

downstream siltation

increased
decreased

wind transported sediments

increased
reduced

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?
seasonal temperature spring decrease moderately
seasonal rainfall spring decrease moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought moderately

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences
How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period moderately

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

very negative

Long-term returns:

positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

negative

Long-term returns:

slightly positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • 1-10%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

C'est la communauté qui accepte la technologie.

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 51-90%
Comments:

Technologie appliquée par les services de l'état.

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

Yes

Specify adaptation of the Technology (design, material/ species, etc.):

Augmenter les conditions de réussite des plantations.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Usagers sont peu favorables en raison de l'exclusion du droit de pâturage en zone plantée.
L'état doit assurer des alternatifs ou des mesures plus interressantes à la compensation des ressources fouragères tirés des zones reboisées.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Technologie nécessaire pour la reconstitution et la durabilité des forêts d'arganier en particulier.
Développer l'approche participative avec les usgaers.

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?
Contraignante pour les activités des usagers. Concertation et encouragements des usagers.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Difficultés de réussir la technologie. Implication et faire adhérer les usagers pour la mise en place de la technologie.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys

Plusieurs visites et enquêtes socio - économiques.

  • interviews with SLM specialists/ experts

Plusieurs personnes.

  • compilation from reports and other existing documentation

Dans le cadre des travaux de recherche encadrés.
Documents de recherche et études.

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

17/01/2017

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules