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)

Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM I)

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?

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Promotion of low-pressure drip irrigation kits among vulnerable women-led households in dry agrolandscapes of Southern Tajikistan has helped to fight desertification, improve food security and enhance economic opportunities.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Low-pressure drip irrigation systems or Family Farm Drip Irrigation (FFDI) kits including water tanks and high-quality planting materials were distributed in the framework of an FAO project. The project aimed at enhancing food production by providing affordable irrigation solutions in dry and saline agrolandscapes of the Central Asian region. The FFDI systems were distributed to 60 women-led households in Khatlon province of Tajikistan. Additionally FFDI systems were installed in eight demonstration plots of organizations and state institutes. The beneficiaries were identified according to selection criteria to best contribute to food security and livelihood improvement through these affordable irrigation solutions. They were trained in irrigation and crop husbandry through a workshop, and their irrigation and plant production activities were monitored. Despite problems with pest management, vulnerable women-headed farms in the climate change affected areas increased crop productivity by 50% and harvested 2 crops a year. Vegetables were the crops of focus, and the average area irrigated was 300m2. Moreover, the application of the mulching helped to preserve more moisture and it helped to reduce irrigation norms by 25-30 per cent. For mulching, wheat straw and/or flax straw with a thickness of 7-10 cm was used. The FFDI system is affordable, does not require pumping, is easy to install and move, is easily adjustable and is supported by an installation kit. However, it does require relatively clean irrigation water. It is recommended to test expanded FFDI systems to continue the promotion of SLM and produce more food.

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:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

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

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):

• Agroforestry

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:

No

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

• water harvesting
• irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)
• home gardens

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
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

Comments:

The marginalized kitchen gardens plots were rehabilitated through the application of drip irrigation, intercropping, crop rotation, composting, mulching and better management of the plots.

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):

TJS

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

9.2

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Layouting of plot for drip irrigation system
2.	Levelling the ploughing, Harrowing
3.	Inter row cultivation
4.	Sowing
5.	Application of mulching
6.	Application of fertilizers
7.	Weeding, 3 times
8.	Harvesting (1 crop - 4 times tomato, 15-20 times cucumber)
9.	Instalment and dismantling of poles and cord for tomato, drip irrigation system
10.	Instalment and dismantling of, drip irrigation system

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	Operation and maintainence on kitchen garden	days	20.0	100.0	2000.0
Equipment	Drip irrigation system including installation	set	1.0	736.0	736.0
Equipment	Water tanks with transportation cost	set	1.0	384.0	384.0
Plant material	Hybrid varieties of cucumber seeds or saplings	package	1.0	230.0	230.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Organic fertilizer	kg	90.0	1.0	90.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Mineral fertilizer (N, P)	kg	12.0	7.0	84.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					3524.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					383.04

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Assembling and unmounting	twice per season

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	Assembling and unmounting	times	2.0	50.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					10.87

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

The 51% of the initial cost was covered by FAO

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

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:

• communal/ village
• individual, not titled

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

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

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	very 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)?

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?

• 0-10%

6.6 Adaptation

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

Yes

If yes, indicate to which changing conditions it was adapted:

• climatic change/ extremes

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The ToT training for promotors and best farmers on the topics of proper operation and maintenance of the drip irrigation systems were delivered to enable the active farmers from the different districts for continuing the promotion of the techniques.
The provided support of the project for most vulnerable families helped to increase family income and benefit from the crops yield increases and water is used with maximum efficiency, weeds cannot absorb water as it is not available for them. there are fewer weeds, soil infiltration capacity is increased, there is no soil erosion, applying water locally, leaching is reduced; fertilizer/nutrient loss is minimized.

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?
Provision of the agriculture inputs for free can negatively affect the promotion of the best SLM techniques after the project life span. High investment costs can be one of the reasons for blocking upscaling.	To find a co-financing source and/or to increase co-financing ratio by the farmers.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Manual for farmers. Using Low-Pressure Drip Irrigation Systems to Irrigate Vegetables and Potatoes, Daler Domullodzhanov, 2012, ISBN 978-99947-913-2-3

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

article "Drip irrigation boosts water efficiency for Tajik farmers"

URL:

https://www.fao.org/europe/news/detail-news/en/c/1189380/