Technologies
New SLM Technology [Tajikistan]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: MIZROBSHO AMIRBEKOV
- Editor: –
- Reviewers: Farrukh Nazarmavloev, Alexandra Gavilano
technologies_3856 - Tajikistan
View sections
Expand all Collapse all
Completeness: 67%
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:
Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Environmental Land Management and Rural Livelihoods (ELMAR)Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH (GIZ) - GermanyName of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation) - Switzerland1.3 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. Description of the SLM Technology
2.3 Photos of the Technology
Media Gallery
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
Tajikistan
Specify the spread of the Technology:
- applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area
Map
×2.6 Date of implementation
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:
- during experiments/ research
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology
- improve production
- conserve ecosystem
- adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
- mitigate climate change and its impacts
- create beneficial economic impact
- create beneficial social impact
3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied
Cropland
- Annual cropping
Number of growing seasons per year:
- 1
Grazing land
Extensive grazing:
- Semi-nomadic pastoralism
3.4 Water supply
Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
- mixed rainfed-irrigated
3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs
- integrated crop-livestock management
- ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
agronomic measures
- A1: Vegetation/ soil cover
management measures
- M1: Change of land use type
- M3: Layout according to natural and human environment
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
physical soil deterioration
- Pu: loss of bio-productive function due to other activities
biological degradation
- Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline
water degradation
- Ha: aridification
3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation
Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
- adapt to land degradation
4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology
Date:
03/08/2017
Date:
27/06/2017
4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
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 =:
9.2
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 | None | None | 1.0 | 55.0 | 55.0 | |
| Labour | None | None | 1.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 | |
| Labour | None | None | 1.0 | 60.0 | 60.0 | |
| Equipment | None | None | 1.0 | 22.0 | 22.0 | |
| Equipment | None | None | 1.0 | 22.0 | 22.0 | |
| Plant material | None | None | 30.0 | 1.1 | 33.0 | |
| Fertilizers and biocides | None | None | 200.0 | 0.54 | 108.0 | |
| Fertilizers and biocides | None | None | 100.0 | 0.54 | 54.0 | |
| Total costs for establishment of the Technology | 379.0 | |||||
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 | None | None | 1.0 | 55.0 | 55.0 | |
| Labour | None | None | 1.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 | |
| Labour | None | None | 1.0 | 60.0 | 60.0 | |
| Equipment | None | None | 1.0 | 22.0 | 22.0 | |
| Equipment | None | None | 1.0 | 23.0 | 23.0 | |
| Plant material | None | None | 30.0 | 1.1 | 33.0 | |
| Fertilizers and biocides | None | None | 200.0 | 0.54 | 108.0 | |
| Fertilizers and biocides | None | None | 100.0 | 0.54 | 54.0 | |
| Total costs for maintenance of the Technology | 380.0 | |||||
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:
500.00
Agro-climatic zone
- semi-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:
5-50 m
Availability of surface water:
poor/ none
Water quality (untreated):
good drinking water
Is water salinity a problem?
No
Is flooding of the area occurring?
No
5.5 Biodiversity
Species diversity:
- medium
Habitat diversity:
- medium
5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology
Sedentary or nomadic:
- Sedentary
Market orientation of production system:
- mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
- 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
- average
Individuals or groups:
- groups/ community
Level of mechanization:
- mechanized/ motorized
Gender:
- women
- men
Age of land users:
- middle-aged
- elderly
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
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- state
Land use rights:
- communal (organized)
Water use rights:
- communal (organized)
5.9 Access to services and infrastructure
health:
- poor
- moderate
- good
education:
- poor
- moderate
- good
technical assistance:
- poor
- moderate
- good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
- poor
- moderate
- good
markets:
- poor
- moderate
- good
energy:
- poor
- moderate
- good
roads and transport:
- poor
- moderate
- good
drinking water and sanitation:
- poor
- moderate
- good
financial services:
- poor
- moderate
- good
6. Impacts and concluding statements
6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown
Socio-economic impacts
Production
crop production
decreased
crop quality
decreased
fodder production
decreased
fodder quality
decreased
animal production
decreased
product diversity
decreased
production area
decreased
Income and costs
farm income
decreased
diversity of income sources
decreased
Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
health situation
worsened
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 | very well | |
| annual rainfall | decrease | very well | |
| seasonal rainfall | summer | very well |
6.4 Cost-benefit analysis
How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:
very positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:
very positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
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
7. References and links
7.1 Methods/ sources of information
- interviews with SLM specialists/ experts
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
No links
Modules
No modules