Technologies

Integrated Farm Land Conservation [Ethiopia]

የተቀናጀ የእርሻ መሬት እንክብካቤ (yetekenaje yeirsha meriet inkibikabie)

technologies_4136 - Ethiopia

Completeness: 92%

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)

land user:

Debeb Belete

Abagerima Kebele Association

Ethiopia

SLM specialist:
Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Carbon Benefits Project (CBP)
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Bureau of Agriculture - Amhara Nation Regional State - Bahir Dar (amhboard) - Ethiopia
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Water and Land Resource Centre (WLRC) - Ethiopia

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

Comments:

The technology is directly related land degradation and hence it can be declared as sustainable land management technology.

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Integrated Farm Land Conservation (IFLC) comprises of farm terrace (bund) construction, construction of drainage structures, bund stabilization and livestock exclosure,

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Integrated Farm Land Conservation (IFLC) is practiced within a watershed on individual farmland. Main characteristics of the technology are conserving soil and moisture and at the same time safe disposal of excess runoff.
Farm terrace construction is actually terrace development, starting with soil or stone bunding that enables the development of a terrace, i.e. bench formation due to soil erosion, sediment deposition and tillage movement through time (5-15 years). The bunds are levelled or graded, the walls having a bottom width of 0.8 - 1.0 m, and a top width of about 0.4 m, the bund height is up to 0.6 m. Bunds are constructed parallel to the slope or slightly graded, on slopes ranging from 8 - 20 % gradients, and at a the vertical interval of 1-2 m between two bunds. The bunds are stabilized with vegetative measures like grass and legume shrubs. The drainage structures consist of the ditch along bunds, cut-off drains above cultivated land and waterways through it, the depth of a cut-off drain being 0.3 - 0.4 m and the average width 1.5 m, the depth of the waterway being 0.3 - 0.5 m, and the width of the waterway being 1.5 - 2 m. For bund and terrace protection in the initial years, livestock is excluded and farmers exercise cut and carry. Livestock exclosure encourages land users to practice crop residue management.
The purpose of the technology, in general, is to conserve soil and water, minimizing slope gradients of the farmland, improve soil moisture, reduce compaction, enhance infiltration and thus improve the recharge of groundwater. Furthermore, livestock exclosure contributes to soil fertility enhancement following crop residue management. The technology initially maintains soil fertility and through time, it has its own contribution to the betterment / increment of crop yield. Nevertheless some farmers complain about the land being occupied by the bunds, although this is later on compensated, as forage can be produced on the riser slopes of the growing terraces.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

General remarks regarding photos:

The photos were all taken during field work on 24 October 2018, while several technologies were assessed by different compilers. In the Abagerima area a full watershed was developed in 2013 by the Water and Land Resource Centre, Addis Ababa University and Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, funded by Swiss Development Cooperation and its Ethiopian partners.

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

Country:

Ethiopia

Region/ State/ Province:

Amhara Region, Ethiopia

Further specification of location:

Abagerima Watershed in the Highlands of Ethiopia

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, specify area covered (in km2):

3.0

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 1-10 km2
Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

No

Comments:

The site is not permanently protected. The site faced some damage due on and off free grazing instead of consistently exercising cut and carry practice. In some cases deliberate damage caused by few individuals by freely grazed the site.

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2013

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:
  • through projects/ external interventions
  • Government led community free labor mobilization for the natural resource conservation measures
Comments (type of project, etc.):

Government-led community free labor mobilization for the natural resource conservation measures, supported by Water and Land Resource Centre, Addis Ababa University and Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern.

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):
  • Agro-silvopastoralism

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
  • Perennial (non-woody) cropping
  • Tree and shrub cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - maize
  • cereals - wheat (winter)
  • legumes and pulses - other
  • teff
Annual cropping system:

Continuous wheat/barley/oats/upland rice

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:
  • avocado
  • coffee, shade grown
  • mango, mangosteen, guava
  • papaya
  • Dodonaea angustifolia, Rhamnus Prinoides, Catha edulis
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Is intercropping practiced?

No

Is crop rotation practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

maize followed by pulses followed by wheat followed by teff, and rarely, fallow.

Grazing land

Grazing land

Intensive grazing/ fodder production:
  • Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing
Animal type:
  • cattle - dairy
  • cattle - non-dairy working
  • goats
  • mules and asses
  • poultry
  • sheep
  • Bees
Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

cattle is mainly used for ploughing (oxen), sheep and goats for meat.

Products and services:
  • meat
  • milk
  • transport/ draught
Species:

cattle - non-dairy working

Count:

2500

Species:

goats

Count:

830

Species:

sheep

Count:

2000

Species:

poultry

Count:

10200

Species:

mules and asses

Count:

1064

Forest/ woodlands

Forest/ woodlands

  • (Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands
  • Tree plantation, afforestation
(Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands: Specify management type:
  • Dead wood/ prunings removal
  • Non-wood forest use
Type of (semi-)natural forest:
  • tropical moist deciduous forest natural vegetation
Tree plantation, afforestation: Specify origin and composition of species:
  • Monoculture exotic variety
  • Mixed varieties
Type of tree plantation, afforestation:
  • tropical mountain systems plantation
Type of tree:
  • Acacia species
  • Eucalyptus globulus
  • Cordia Africana, Olea african, Ficus vasta, Croton macrostachyus
Are the trees specified above deciduous or evergreen?
  • mixed deciduous/ evergreen
Products and services:
  • Timber
  • Fuelwood
  • Grazing/ browsing
Comments:

Livestock population data for the whole watershed

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)
Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):
  • Agro-silvopastoralism
Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
  • Perennial (non-woody) cropping
  • Tree and shrub cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - maize
  • cereals - wheat (winter)
  • legumes and pulses - other
  • teff
Annual cropping system:

Continuous wheat/barley/oats/upland rice

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:
  • coffee, shade grown
  • Dodonaea angustifolia, Rhamnus Prinoides, Catha edulis
Is intercropping practiced?

No

Is crop rotation practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

maize followed by pulses followed by wheat followed by teff, and rarely, fallow

Grazing land

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:
  • Semi-nomadic pastoralism
  • Ranching
Animal type:
  • cattle - non-dairy working
  • goats
  • sheep
Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

livestock was allowed to graze all over the place before conservation, except on cultivated land during the growing season.

Products and services:
  • meat
  • milk
  • transport/ draught
Forest/ woodlands

Forest/ woodlands

  • (Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands
(Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands: Specify management type:
  • Clear felling
  • Dead wood/ prunings removal
Type of (semi-)natural forest:
  • tropical mountain systems natural vegetation
Type of tree:
  • Acacia species
  • Eucalyptus globulus
Are the trees specified above deciduous or evergreen?
  • mixed deciduous/ evergreen
Products and services:
  • Timber
  • Fuelwood
  • Grazing/ browsing
Comments:

Land use change (of Abagerima watershed over the intervention periods (2010 and 2017):

Land use change Ha.
Cultivated land to bush/ shrub land4.1
Cultivated land to degraded grass land 3.9
Cultivated land to grass land 5.8
Cultivated land to Homestead 8.0
Cultivated land to plantation 4.9
Degraded grass land to bush/ shrub land 1.2
Grass land to bush/ shrub land 3.2
Grass land to cultivated land 6.1
Grass land to degraded grass land 4.0
Grass land to riverine vegetation1.2

Source: - Achievements and Impacts of Learning Watershed Approach: Technologies, Innovations and Evidence for Scaling up WLRC Research Report 3, Addis Ababa University, 2019, Addis Ababa

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • rainfed
Comments:

cropping is based mainly on rain-fed, farmers utilize groundwater for perennial crop production on a small scale in their homestead development areas

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • area closure (stop use, support restoration)
  • integrated crop-livestock management
  • water diversion and drainage

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
  • A5: Seed management, improved varieties
  • A6: Residue management
A6: Specify residue management:

A 6.4: retained

vegetative measures

vegetative measures

  • V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants
structural measures

structural measures

  • S1: Terraces
  • S2: Bunds, banks
  • S3: Graded ditches, channels, waterways
  • S4: Level ditches, pits
management measures

management measures

  • M1: Change of land use type
  • M2: Change of management/ intensity level

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
  • Wg: gully erosion/ gullying
  • Wr: riverbank erosion
  • Wo: offsite degradation effects
physical soil deterioration

physical soil deterioration

  • Pc: compaction
  • Pi: soil sealing
biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
  • Bh: loss of habitats
  • Bl: loss of soil life
  • Bp: increase of pests/ diseases, loss of predators
water degradation

water degradation

  • Hs: change in quantity of surface water
  • Hg: change in groundwater/aquifer level
  • Hp: decline of surface water quality
  • Hq: decline of groundwater quality

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. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The height of the bund is less than 0.6 m, the width of the bund is less than 1.6 m, the average slope is 8 - 15 %, the veritcal interval between two bunds is 1- 2 m, and the average spacing between structures is about 15 m

Author:

Yismaw Wuletaw

Date:

24/10/2018

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:

300 ha

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 =:

1.0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

3 USD

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Cutoff drain After crop harvesting
2. Waterway After crop harvesting
3. Stone-faced soil bund After crop harvesting
4. Bund stabilization At the onset of the rainy season

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 cutoff-off drain Person day 2600.0 3.0 7800.0 1.0
Labour Waterway Person day 3500.0 3.0 10500.0 1.0
Labour Stone-faced soil bund Person day 14100.0 3.0 42300.0 1.0
Labour Bund stabilization Person day 1500.0 3.0 4500.0 1.0
Other Hand tools (shovel, pick-ax) No 1080.0 2.89 3121.2 0.0
Other Water level No 24.0 2.17 52.08 0.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 68273.28
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 68273.28
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

Government-led community free labor mobilization for the natural resource conservation measures, supported by Water and Land Resource Centre, Addis Ababa University and Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern.

Comments:

The community contributed free labor contribution. The government and Water and Land Resource Center provided technical(capacity building and monitoring) and input support.
According to the 2019 Project unpublished report, the total person days (pds) for Abagerima Community Watershed is 181,920 and for Integrated Farm land Conservation approximately 43,400 person days (Source: Gombat and Laguna Kebele level Office of Agriculture). By virtue, the community contributed their labour almost for half working day (four hours) the total person days have been divided by 2 and multiplied by 3 USD (which is the approximate daily rate).
Regarding the tool cost, the cost was covered by the government and the project (WLRC).

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Cutoff drain After crop harvesting
2. Waterway After crop harvesting
3. Stone-faced soil bund After crop harvesting
4. Bund stabilization At the onset of the rain

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 Stone faced soil bund person day 10000.0 3.0 30000.0 1.0
Labour Bund stabilization person day 200.0 3.0 600.0 10.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 30600.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 30600.0
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

The community contributed free labor contribution. The WLRC provided capacity development and input support.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The season, as especially during sowing, weeding and harvesting times the labour costs are scarce and hence, high.

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
Agro-climatic zone
  • sub-humid

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)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

< 5 m

Availability of surface water:

medium

Water quality (untreated):

poor drinking water (treatment required)

Water quality refers to:

surface water

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

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:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
  • less than 10% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • poor
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
  • animal traction
Gender:
  • women
  • men
Age of land users:
  • youth
  • middle-aged

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)?
  • small-scale

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

Land ownership:
  • state
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • communal (organized)
  • individual
Water use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)
  • individual
Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

No

Comments:

In case of drinking water, there is some organization to manage the resource

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
increased
Comments/ specify:

It is because of integrated farmland conservation measures and improved use of agricultural input

crop quality

decreased
increased

fodder production

decreased
increased

fodder quality

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Weed also grows together with forage grass and reduces the quality of grass.

animal production

decreased
increased

wood production

decreased
increased

forest/ woodland quality

decreased
increased

non-wood forest production

decreased
increased

risk of production failure

increased
decreased

product diversity

decreased
increased

production area

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

irrigation water availability

decreased
increased

irrigation water quality

decreased
increased

demand for irrigation water

increased
decreased
Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased
decreased

farm income

decreased
increased

diversity of income sources

decreased
increased

economic disparities

increased
decreased

workload

increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency

reduced
improved

health situation

worsened
improved

land use/ water rights

worsened
improved

community institutions

weakened
strengthened

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved

conflict mitigation

worsened
improved

situation of socially and economically disadvantaged groups

worsened
improved

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

water quantity

decreased
increased

water quality

decreased
increased

harvesting/ collection of water

reduced
improved

surface runoff

increased
decreased

excess water drainage

reduced
improved

groundwater table/ aquifer

lowered
recharge

evaporation

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

This includes evapotranspiration

Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased

soil cover

reduced
improved

soil loss

increased
decreased

soil accumulation

decreased
increased

soil crusting/ sealing

increased
reduced

soil compaction

increased
reduced

nutrient cycling/ recharge

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Crop residue management following livestock exclosure from the farmland.

salinity

increased
decreased

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased
increased

acidity

increased
reduced
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Vegetation cover

decreased
increased

biomass/ above ground C

decreased
increased

plant diversity

decreased
increased

invasive alien species

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

Not alien species, but the common weed species getting spread.

animal diversity

decreased
increased

beneficial species

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

But the bee colony is getting decreased due to the use of pesticide and insecticide.

habitat diversity

decreased
increased

pest/ disease control

decreased
increased
Climate and disaster risk reduction

flood impacts

increased
decreased

landslides/ debris flows

increased
decreased

drought impacts

increased
decreased

impacts of cyclones, rain storms

increased
decreased

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Due to minimizing the number of livestock from time to time. It is due to the fact that farmers are unable to manage under better/ intensive management following controlled grazing.

fire risk

increased
decreased

wind velocity

increased
decreased

micro-climate

worsened
improved

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

water availability

decreased
increased

reliable and stable stream flows in dry season

reduced
increased
Comments/ specify:

Seasonal streams apparently have runoff longer into the dry season than before soil and water conservation, according to land users' observations.

downstream flooding

increased
reduced

downstream siltation

increased
decreased

groundwater/ river pollution

increased
reduced

buffering/ filtering capacity

reduced
improved

wind transported sediments

increased
reduced

damage on neighbours' fields

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?
annual temperature increase well
seasonal temperature dry season increase well
annual rainfall well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
tropical storm well
local rainstorm well
local thunderstorm moderately
local hailstorm moderately

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

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

negative

Long-term returns:

positive

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

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

positive

Comments:

The farmland owner considers "with" and "without" scenario and the comparative labour cost.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 91-100%

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
1. Conserving the soil and water and hence reduce flood hazard, 2. Avoiding traditional ditches and minimizing conflict due flood, 3. Minimizing/ lowering the slope of the farmland, 4. Improving the surface and groundwater potential, 5. Contributing to the betterment of yield,
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
1. Conserving the soil and water and hence reduce flood hazard, 2. Avoiding traditional ditches and minimizing conflict due flood, 3. Minimizing/ lowering the slope of the farmland, 4. Improving the surface and groundwater potential, 5. Maintain soil fertility and through time improves the fertility status, 6. Contributing to the betterment of yield.

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?
Expansion of rodents, Construction of ditches to protect rodents around the farm.
Land occupied by the structures. Producing forage on the structures including bunds and drainage structures.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Unable to utilize more the area occupied by the structure. Considering agroclimatic situation of the area, there is an opportunity to produce high-value crops. So, better to consider forage, selected fruit or other trees that will produce short, medium and long-term benefits.
Limitation on integration of biological measures (agronomic measures), like green manuring, inter-cropping to improve soil fertility and hence minimize flood/erosion, and to improve productivity, Providing inputs aiming at demonstrating how to practice green manuring (like Lupine, Sesbania sesban) and inter-cropping (like pigeon pea, which offers additional production besides to soil fertility).
Limitation, partially, on maintaining the interval between two successive bunds. Establishing grass, bushes, fruit hedgerows in between two successive bunds.
Limitation on the number of tillage operations. Minimizing the number of tillage for annual crop production not to further disturb soil aggregates and enhance sealing and run off. Better to consider conservation agriculture (CA) if capacity building and input provision is put in place for demonstration and dissemination.
Limitation on institutional capacity building (from the community watershed committee up to the regional and federal levels) regarding the concept of Integrated farm land conservation (the view is focused more on physical structures and to some extent on bund stabilization). Building the capacity of the respective heads/ leaders/ community representatives on the role of integrating bio-physical and soil fertility enhancement measures so as to maximize the benefits of soil and moisture conservation, improve infiltration/ recharging, minimize soil erosion, enhance soil fertility and hence crop productivity in a sustained manner. Thus the contribution for carbon sequestration is also enhanced.
The declining trend in traditional crop rotation leads to soil fertility depletion and aggravates crop pests. Improving soil fertility, use of input (selective crop varieties and organic and inorganic fertilizers), and improving the traditional crop rotation so as to minimize soil fertility depletion.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys

Two

  • interviews with land users

Mr. Belete Debeb

  • interviews with SLM specialists/ experts

Mr. Melese Bililgin

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

24/10/2018

Comments:

Transect walk was undertaken through the watershed. An interview was done with the land user.

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Integrated Farm Land, Conservation, Yismaw Wuletaw, 2018

Available from where? Costs?

Can be obtained from author

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

none

URL:

-

7.4 General comments

The questionnaire is easily understood and can be filled provided that the information can be collected in the field or with informants.

General remark: The comments are forwarded, as observed at field, because when we talk about Integrated Farm Land Conservation (IFLC), it should be integrated as much as possible/ inclusive for better results, as the ultimate goals of IFLC are:
oEnvironmental benefits - Conserving soil and moisture, carbon sequestration, improving the local climate;
oEconomic benefits - improving crop productivity, generating forage as a result of structural stabilization, and if it is implemented in an organized manner, it can also generate further economic benefits from gesho, fruit and selected trees like Grevillea robusta and Acacia dicurrens planted on structures;
oSocial benefits – contributing to social prestige as a result of producing reasonable production (if the concept of “optimizing the productivity per unit area, water and time” is respected, the livelihood of the rural community is also improved simply due to maintaining healthy soil and use of input for structural stabilization – i.e making the structures productive. In advanced terms, if IFLC is implemented in a well organized manner, the production through protection concept will be maintained. Thus, IFLC will contribute to the stability of the community within their surroundings/ watersheds and enable the transferring healthy soil/ land for the next generation.

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules