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

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)

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:

To prevent large crop losses, it is recommended to water row crops through the furrow. Dry and watered furrows are rotated. Watering is carried out during periods of lack of water (low water).

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Irrigated agriculture is the basis of agricultural production in Uzbekistan. However, water scarcity is a limiting factor, especially in dry years. Watering through the furrow is a technological method used by farmers in conditions of limited water supply. This allows to reduce the duration of irrigation by 1.3 - 2.4 times. The water demand for irrigation and the total water consumption (evaporation and transpiration) is reduced by 20-25%. Due to the technology, the cotton bushes are short with a well-developed root system. Monitoring of soil moisture using sensors showed that soil moisture at a depth of 40 cm in dry (not flooded) and wet (flooded) furrows is almost the same at the beginning of the second irrigation.
Consequently, in conditions of close groundwater table, it is better to start irrigation through the furrow not from the first irrigation, but from the second irrigation. This will minimize the possible crop damage because of the lack of soil moisture. The soil moisture equitability (and salt background) can be ensured by the rotation of irrigated and non-irrigated furrows at each subsequent irrigation. It is recommended to rotate flooded and dry furrows from watering to watering (even - 1 watering, odd - second watering, etc.).
Esteblishment activities and costs of inputs
Activities and contributions to the introduction / content: The practice of preparing the field is common, as with the farmer. On the plot of irrigated land under sowing of cotton (farm field), furrows are cut 100 m long, irrigation through the furrow is carried out by supplying more than usual water consumption
1. Land preparation: site levelling, plowing, salinization flushing
2. Channel development
3. Furrow irrigation
4. Agro-technological operations.
5. Flushing after cotton vegetation

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
• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production

• Reducing water costs for irrigation and preventing crop losses within a lack of water is the main task

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

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• full irrigation

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Other: Adaptation to the lack of irrigation water by improving the furrow irrigation method

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Less leaching of nutrients from the soil by irrigation water. Secondary salinization is caused by natural conditions (arid climate, difficult conditions for soil outflow) and anthropogenic activities (inefficient use of irrigation and drainage infrastructure, non-compliance with irrigation standards). The decrease in humus content is the result of disturbances in agricultural technology (low standards of organic fertilizers, harvesting of plant residues from the fields). Soil compaction is caused by plowing the soil with a dump plow at the same depth (the formation of a “sub-sole”). Colmatation of soil pores by suspended particles of irrigation water contributed to the reduction of porosity, water permeability, air capacity of the soil. Biological degradation is caused by the deterioration of the habitat of soil organisms due to salinization and low humus content.

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

The Technology provides a reduction in nutrient removal during irrigation, reduces the total evaporation from irrigation fields as a result of irrigation through a furrow

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

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

4150.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Land preparation: site levelling, plowing	Autumn
2.	Flushing	February - March
3.	Preparing for sowing and cotton sowing	April
4.	Channel development	May - June
5.	Furrow irrigation and agrotechnological plant care operations	June - August

Comments:

Cotton cultivation is carried out according to traditional technology, as in the usual practice of the farmer

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	Labor costs	USD/ha	1.0	10.0	10.0	100.0
Equipment	Mechanization costs (levelling, channel development)	USD	1.0	249.4	249.4	100.0
Other	The acquisition of Weir (Thomson)	USD	4.0	1.2	4.8
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					264.2
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					0.06

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

paid by the Project

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Land preparation: site levelling, plowing	Autumn
2.	Flushing	February-March
3.	Preparing for sowing and cotton sowing	April
4.	Channel development	May-June
5.	Furrow irrigation and agrotechnological plant care operations	June - August

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	Labor costs	USD/ha	1.0	10.0	10.0	100.0
Equipment	Mechanization costs (levelling, channel development)	USD/ha	1.0	249.4	249.4	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					259.4
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					0.06

If you are unable to break down the costs in the table above, give an estimation of the total costs of maintaining the Technology:

259.4

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The Technology does not require additional imputs. Propaganda and awareness raising are needed to scale up the Technology

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

105-120 m (Khorezm) and 273 m (Syrdarya, Gulistan) above sea level

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.

Meadow soils, humus content in the arable layer is less than 1%. The volume density (g / cm3) is 1.52 and 1.45-1.51 g / cm3 (Syrdarya region), field water capacity (% by weight) is 20.3-21.9% (Khorezm region) and 25.0-28.0 (Syrdarya region)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Yes

Specify:

Water suitable for irrigation

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Water in surface sources is polluted from discharges of drainage from irrigation fields

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Vegetation is represented by cultivated plant species: cotton, wheat, vegetables, melons, perennial plantings of fruit and ornamental trees and shrubs

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

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:

• leased

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

Water availability and quality

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

The Technology does not have negative off-site impact

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	summer	increase	well
annual rainfall		decrease	well
seasonal rainfall	spring	decrease	well
seasonal rainfall	summer	decrease	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)?

Comments:

The Technology does not require additional costs for implementation and maintenance. It prevents possible losses due to lack of water. It was shown In experiments conducted in the Khorezm region: reducing the cost of irrigation water up to 33% is achieved, in the Syr Darya region: reducing the cost of irrigation water up to 50% is achieved

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 11-50%

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

• 11-50%

6.6 Adaptation

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

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The Technology does not require additional costs
The Technology is easy to implement
The Technology reduces the need for irrigation water

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The Technology is easy to implement and accessible to all land users
The Technology avoids crop losses during periods of water scarcity
The Technology reduces nutrient removal from irrigation water during irrigation

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?
Land users did not note any weaknesses

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
There is a risk of secondary salinization on saline soils	Strictly adhere to the recommended irrigation regime

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

"Water conservation on the field - a measure to solve global problems of providing water resources", Shirokova Yu.I., Paluashova G.K.

Available from where? Costs?

Materials of the Republican scientific-practical conference of the Central Asian Scientific Research Institute of Irrigation "Actual problems of water management and land reclamation of irrigated lands" December 12, 2011 Tashkent. S. 196-201

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Water saving effect of the simplified surge flow and alternate dry furrow methods in Uzbekistan. Junya Onishi, Paluashova Ghavharay, Hiroshi Ikeura.

Available from where? Costs?

The 12 –th Conference of International Society of Paddy and Water Environment Engineering «Agricultural water and rural environment for the future» 30 October-1 November 2013. Cheongju, KOREA, 2013. С. 31-42.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Water saving on the field during irrigation through the furrow in the saline lands of Khorezm. 3.Paluashova G. Shirokova Yu.I.

Available from where? Costs?

The journal "Bulletin of the Agrarian Science of Uzbekistan", No. 2 (56) 2014. P. 30-34.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

The study of the effectiveness of irrigation of cotton through the furrow in saline soils. Paluashova G.K., Shirokova Yu.I., Zhuniya O.

Available from where? Costs?

The journal "Irrigation and Land Reclamation" No. 02 (4). 2016.S. 9-13. (Uzbekistan)

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Water conservation on the field - analysis of opportunities. Shirokova Yu.I., Paluashova G.K.

Available from where? Costs?

Reports of the II International Scientific and Practical Conference “Scientific Support as a Factor of Sustainable Development of Water Resources” June 24, 2016 Taraz. S. 479-484. (Kazakhstan)

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Features of irrigation of cotton through the furrow in saline soils of Uzbekistan. 6.Paluashova G.K., Onishi J., Shirokova Yu.I.

Available from where? Costs?

The path of science. International Scientific Journal, No. 5 (39), 2017, ISSN 2311-2158. The Way of Science. 2017. No. 5 (39). S.35-37. (Moscow, Russia).