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)

Community-based sustainable land and forest management in Afghanistan

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

FAO Afghanistan (FAO Afghanistan) - Afghanistan

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

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Restoring degraded rangelands through quarantine in Qadis district, Badghis Afghanistan

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) project of “Community-based sustainable land and forest management in Afghanistan” aimed to promote biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation, and rangeland productivity through introducing community-based sustainable land and forest management (SLM/SFM) practices in rangeland and forest areas within five targeted provinces, including Badghis, that benefited rural communities that rely on these ecosystems for their livelihood.
In June 2022, a 1,000-hectare rangeland quarantine area was established to promote the rehabilitation of degraded land and restore the natural vegetation cover. This area was strategically enclosed with clearly marked benchmark boundaries to prevent grazing and ensure its complete protection. By protecting this area from human interference and grazing, the land has been given the opportunity to recover naturally.
The quarantine area has shown remarkable improvements in the health of its ecosystem. Native grasses, shrubs, and bushes have successfully rehabilitated, with noticeable growth and regeneration. The efforts to protect this area have allowed these plants to thrive without the pressure of overgrazing, leading to the revitalization of the local flora.
A significant outcome of the quarantine area is its role as a natural seed bank. Native seeds collected from this rehabilitated land are now being stored and used for reseeding other degraded rangelands. These seeds, adapted to the local environment, have high potential for successful regeneration when used to restore other areas facing similar ecological challenges. This process not only supports the rehabilitation of nearby rangelands but also contributes to the long-term sustainability and resilience of the local ecosystem.
The success of this quarantine area highlights the importance of protective measures and demonstrates the potential for land recovery through strategic interventions. As a result, this area serves as both a model for rangeland rehabilitation and a valuable resource for future restoration efforts across the region.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.4 Videos 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

Indicate year of implementation:

2022

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

Comments (type of project, etc.):

GEF-06 SLM project in Afghanistan

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• mitigate climate change and its impacts

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

No

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Rainfall occurs in December to April

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• area closure (stop use, support restoration)
• pastoralism and grazing land management
• improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Effective waste management in quarantined rangelands is essential for maintaining the ecological integrity of these protected areas if not managed, excessive organic matter can lead to the proliferation of pests and diseases that may harm native vegetation and disrupt the rehabilitation process.

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

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 =:

75.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Survey and site selection followed by feasibility study	1st month 10/04/2022
2.	Preparing construction material like rock	2nd month 08/05/2022
3.	Construction of benchmark boundaries around the area	3rd month 01/06/2022
4.	Capacity building of the target communities	4th month 05/07/2022
5.	Hiring guard for patrolling the area	5th month 01/08/2022

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	Skilled labour for construction of benchmark	person/day	60.0	750.0	45000.0
Labour	Unskilled labour for construction of benchmark	person/day	130.0	350.0	45500.0	100.0
Labour	Guard for patrolling the area	person/day	2.0	72000.0	144000.0	50.0
Construction material	Rock	M3	100.0	600.0	60000.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					294500.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					3926.67

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

50 % cost of guard for patrolling the area paid by FAO/GEF

Comments:

Cost of skilled labour for construction of benchmark was paid FAO/GEF

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Patrolling the area	All seasons/regular

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	Guard for patrolling the area	person/year	2.0	72000.0	144000.0	50.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					144000.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					1920.0

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

50 % cost of guard for patrolling the area paid by FAO/GEF

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Skilled and unskilled labour

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

Comments and further specifications on topography:

1800 m above sea level and slope angle is 20 %

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

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

The rangelands are characterized by flora diversity and likely host a variety of plant species that are adapted to arid conditions. These include drought-resistant grasses like Eragrostis species, shrubs like Acantholimon caryophllaceum, Artemisia and some endemic plant species unique to the region (Achillea nabilis, Cardaria draba, Cousinia resinosa).

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

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

Specify:

Traditional land use rights

Comments:

Land use rights are held collectively by communities, reflecting a communal approach to resource management.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

Specify assessment of on-site impacts (measurements):

N/A

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

N/A

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		decrease	moderately
annual rainfall		increase	moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local windstorm	moderately

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
heatwave	moderately
drought	moderately

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
flash flood	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)?

Comments:

Improved rangelands often lead to higher forage yields, supporting larger and healthier livestock populations. This can result in increased income for land users.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

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?

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Rangeland quarantine allow for better management of pasture resources leading to improved pasture and grass quality.
Rangeland quarantine increased productivity can maximize the land's carrying capacity leading to higher livestock productivity per unit area.
Rangeland quarantine helps prevent overgrazing, reduces parasite loads, minimizes soil compaction, and allows for more natural feeding behaviors, all of which contribute to overall animal health.
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions through carbon sequestration.
Properly managed rangeland quarantine can promote biodiversity by creating varied habitats and supporting a range of plant and animal species.
Implementing rangeland quarantine can lead to knowledge transfer among farmers, researchers, and agricultural extension services, fostering innovation and best practices in sustainable land management.

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?
Ensuring the right number of animals on each grazing area can be challenging, leading to risks of overgrazing or underutilization.	Stocking rate management.
Rangeland quarantine can lead to social conflicts among different user groups, such as conflicting interests between livestock owners, conservationists, and indigenous communities.	Facilitating dialogue among stakeholders, promoting collaborative rangeland management approaches, respecting traditional land tenure systems, and fostering community-based conflict resolution mechanisms can help manage.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
When grazing animals are quarantined, their numbers may increase in certain areas, leading to overgrazing. This can result in habitat degradation and loss of plant diversity.	Implement managed grazing systems to control population densities and prevent overgrazing. This can include rotational grazing practices.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.4 General comments

This questionnaire serves as an ideal model to showcase the work modality and shared experiences with other regions. By evaluating this type of work model, individuals interested in this field can easily adjust their activities and increase their chances of success.