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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling out Sustainable Land Management (GEF-FAO / DS-SLM)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 697, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Bangladesh Forest Department (Bangladesh Forest Department) - Bangladesh', 'template': 'raw'}

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:

The coppice management of Sal (Shorea robusta) tree is a forest management practice to regain the natural forest resources in central and northern parts of Bangladesh.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Sal forests have a fairly wide and interrupted distribution in the drier central and northern parts of the country. These tropical moist deciduous forests are popularly known as Sal forest as the predominant species is Sal (Shorea robusta). The importance of Sal forests lies in the fact that these are the only natural forest resources of the central and northern parts of Bangladesh where the majority of the country’s population lives. Historically, the agrarian rural people around the forests have been heavily dependent on Sal forests for their livelihood. Until the beginning of the 20th century, Sal forests existed as a large continuous belt with rich biological resources but increasing pressure from population growth has been placed on them ever since. Most of the Sal forests have either become degraded in quality or reduces by conversion to agricultural land.
The Forest Department introduced coppice management with natural regeneration in Sal forest that have a rotation of 20-30 years to regain the forest structure and biomass. Coppicing is a traditional method of forest management, which exploits the capacity of tree species to put out new shoots from their stump or roots if cut down. Due to the fact that shoots perform better than seedlings, because they obtain water, nutrients and carbohydrates from a well-developed root system of the parent tree, they are more resilient to human disturbances that affect tree growth and survival. As new growth emerges after a number of years, the coppiced tree is harvested, and the cycle begins again. Therefore, coppicing is considered an efficient mechanism by which trees regain above-ground biomass immediately after disturbance.
The Gazipur Sal forest is located in lowland plain areas of the central parts of Bangladesh. The average temperature in Gazipur is 25.8 °C and the annual rainfall is 2036 mm. The area is densely populated with a population density of 2,505 per square km. The dominant land use is still agriculture, but industrialization rate is higher in the area as it is only 25km away from capital Dhaka. The Sal forest area is managed by Bangladesh Forest division. Co-management approach is introduced in some buffer areas for the coppice management of Shorea robusta with a profit-sharing ratio of 65:25 between forest department and community beneficiaries. The rest of 10% money allocated for further tree farming activities.
No new planting of Sal seedlings is necessary for this practice. In the first year a relatively poor-quality Sal stand of Gazipur site were selected where coppice regeneration took place from stumps. Then, the multiple shoots regenerated from the stump were singled to three best shoots per stump and the rest were harvested. These three shoots were maintained in the following years and new shoots were removed if there were any. In addition, regular weeding was needed to maintain the technology. Local community people engaged to the maintenance and surveillance activities through co-management modalities and they will get their profit share after harvesting of the mature stand.
Where the density of Sal stumps is between 200-400 stems/ha, coppice management potentially protects and promotes the growth of new Sal seedling and other natural species in open areas. The native species regeneration under coppice management helps protect biodiversity value in a cost-effective manner. Coppice Sal Forests have the capacity to regenerate a rich variety of Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs). The major NTFPs collected by the co-management beneficiaries include fuelwood, dry leaves for fuel, and medicinal plants. Apart from this, they also collect mushroom, tuber crops, wild fruits, cane, honey and resin from coppice forests. As the area is under permanently protected area the beneficiaries cannot harvest any timber from the stand.
As the artificial regeneration of Sal is difficult, the sustainable forest management can be ensured through coppice management of Sal. In Gazipur, the depleted Sal forest are now slowly regaining its health and habitats for wildlife are improving as well. These forests, which historically were seen as timber sources, are now managed for multiple products through coppice management. The forest now supports alternate income for community people and also playing important role for ecological balance of this region.

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:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• create beneficial economic impact
• create beneficial social impact

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

No

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• No (Continue with question 3.4)

Comments:

The original Sal forest stand faced rapid reduction through over-exploitation, deforestation, excessive leaf-litter collection, encroachment, indiscriminate collection of specific economically important plant species (i.e medicinal, fodder etc), and other form of human interference. This was degraded forest with some scatter trees.

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

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

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

other/ national currency (specify):

BDT

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

84.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Site preparation (prepare plantation site map with GPS, jungle cutting, debris collection)	June-July
2.	Thinning (removal of unwanted shoots from stumps)	June-July
3.	Application of fertilizer (compost)	July

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	Site preparation (prepare plantation site map with GPS, jungle cutting, debris collection)	person-days	5.0	500.0	2500.0	100.0
Labour	Thinning (removal of unwanted shoots from stumps)	person-days	12.0	500.0	6000.0	100.0
Labour	Application of fertilizer	person-days	5.0	500.0	2500.0	100.0
Equipment	Spade, saw, bucket, knife, etc.	lump sum	1.0	2000.0	2000.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Compost fertilizer	kg	2000.0	4.0	8000.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					21000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					250.0

Comments:

Bangladesh Forest Department is the land owner and bear the cost of this practice

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	1st year weeding	3 times
2.	2nd year weeding	3 times
3.	3rd year weeding	2 times
4.	4th year weeding	1 time

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	1st year weeding	person-days	12.0	500.0	6000.0	100.0
Labour	2nd year weeding	person-days	12.0	500.0	6000.0	100.0
Labour	3rd year weeding	person-days	8.0	500.0	4000.0	100.0
Labour	4th year weeding	person-days	4.0	500.0	2000.0	100.0
Equipment	Spade, saw, bucket, knife, etc.	Lump-sum	1.0	2000.0	2000.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					20000.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					238.1

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labor cost

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

5.5 Biodiversity

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:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

No

Specify:

Participatory forest management in coppice Sal forest with local commuities

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

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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	summer	increase	well
annual rainfall		decrease	well
seasonal rainfall	wet/ rainy season	increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	well
local thunderstorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	moderately

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)?

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%

Comments:

Forest department adopted the technology and replicate it in other Sal forest area with co-management approach

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
Establishment and maintenance costs arelow.
Artificial regeneration of Sal is difficult. Through coppice management forest coverage can be ensured for long period.
The population of the community can cover their fuel needs from the Sal forests.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Increases the soil fertility of the degraded land through nutrient cycle.
Biodiversity conservation through habitat improvement.
Increase of carbon sequestration.

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?
Protection from illicit felling of Sal is difficult.	Community people need to be engage in patrolling
Occurrence of fire in dry seasons hampered Sal coppice stand

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Timber yield from coppice stand of Sal is inferior in comparison with original stand of Sal.	Vacancy filling can be done with high value timber species

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Islam KK, Sato N, 2012. Deforestation, land conversion and illegal logging in Bangladesh: the case of the Sal (Shorea robusta) forests. iForest 5: 171-178 [online 2012-06-25]

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.sisef.it/iforest/contents? id=ifor0578-005

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Hossain, M.K. 2015. Silviculture of Plantaion Trees of Bangladesh, ISBN:978-984-33-9767-6

Available from where? Costs?

Arannayk Foundation, Dhaka, Bangladesh. US$ 15

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Joint Forest Management and Adaptation of Sal (Shorea robusta) and Its Flexibility in Wide Range of Ecological factors in Forest Gardens

URL:

http://ajast.net/data/uploads/5022.pdf

7.4 General comments

The questionnaire covers all the aspect of the practice