Null

Government of Afghanistan
Ministry of Counter Narcotics
Vienna International Centre, PO Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria

Tel.: (+43-1) 26060-0, Fax: (+43-1) 26060-5866, www.unodc.org
Afghanistan
cannabis survey 2009
April 2010
United Nations publication FOR UNITED NATIONS USE ONLY

ISBN ???-??-?-??????-?
ISSN ????-????
Sales No. T.08.XI.7
Printed in Austria
ST/NAR.3/2007/1 (E/NA) job no.—Date—copies
Afghanistan Cannabis Survey 2009
ABBREVIATIONS
ANDS Afghanistan National Drug Strategy
AOPS Annual Opium Poppy Survey
CNPA Counter Narcotics Police of Afghanistan
ICMP Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme (UNODC)
MCN Ministry of Counter-Narcotics
UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The following organizations and individuals contributed to the implementation of the 2009
Afghanistan Cannabis Survey and to the preparation of this report:
Ministry of Counter-Narcotics:
Dr. Mohammad Zafar (Deputy Minister), Mohammad Ibrahim Azhar (Deputy Minister)
Dr. Mohammad Nabi Hussaini (Director General), Policy &Coordination,
Mir Abdullah (Deputy Director of Survey and Monitoring Directorate)
Survey Coordinators: Eshaq Masumi (Central Region), Abdul Mateen (Eastern Region), Abdul Latif
Ehsan (Western Region), Fida Mohammad (Northern Region), Mohammed Ishaq Anderabi (North-Eastern
Region), Hashmatullah Asek (Southern Region)
Mohammad Khyber Wardak (Data entry supervisor), Mohammad Ajmal (Data entry), Sahar (Data entry),
Mohammad Hakim Hayat (Data entry).
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (Afghanistan, Kabul)
Jean-Luc Lemahieu (Country Representative, UNODC Afghanistan), Ashita Mittal (Deputy
Representative, Programme) and Kelly Smith (Deputy Representative, Operations), Devashish Dhar
(International Project Coordinator), Devaki Shrestha (International Consultant), Ziauddin Zaki (National
Project Coordinator), Abdul Manan Ahmadzai (Survey Officer), Noor Mohammad Sadiq (Database
Developer), Remote sensing analysts: Ahmad Jawid Ghiasee and Sayed Sadat Mehdi
Survey Coordinators: Abdul Basir Basirat (Eastern Region), Abdul Jalil (Northern Region), Abdul Qadir
Palwal (Southern Region), Fawad Alaie (Western Region), Mohammad Rafi Kabiri (North-eastern
Region), Rahimullah Omar (Central Region), Sayed Ahmad (Southern Region), Abdul Rahim Marikh
(Eastern Region), Fardin Osmani (Northern Region)
Provincial Coordinators: Fazal Mohammad Fazli (Southern Region), Mohammad Alam Ghalib (Eastern
Region), Altaf Hussain Joya (Western Region), Mohammed Alem Yaqubi (North-eastern Region),
Lutfurhaman Lutfi (Northern Region)
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (Vienna)
Sandeep Chawla (Director, Division for Policy Analysis and Public Affairs), Angela Me (Chief, Statistics
and Surveys Section-SASS), Martin Raithelhuber (Programme Officer), Coen Bussink (GIS Expert),
Philip Davis (Statistician), Javier Teran (Statistician), Dorien Braam (Intern)
The implementation of the survey would not have been possible without the dedicated work of the field
surveyors, who often faced difficult security conditions. One of them lost his life during ground truth
collection in the south.
The Afghanistan Cannabis Survey 2009 was financed by the United States of America. UNODC’s illicit
crop monitoring activities in Afghanistan were made possible by financial contributions from the
Governments of Germany, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States of America.
This report is dedicated to the memory Late Amanullah, who was
tragically killed in Kandahar in October 2009 while undertaking work
for this cannabis survey. He was an honest and dedicated surveyor
who had been involved in Afghanistan opium poppy cultivation surveys
with UNODC and MCN for some eight years.
We take this opportunity to express our sincere condolences to his

family, who have suffered an irreparable loss and their only
breadwinner.
CONTENTS
KEY FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................................

1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................9
2 FINDINGS................................................................................................................................................11
CANNABIS CULTIVATION ......................................................................................................................... 11
CANNABIS AND OPIUM CULTIVATION .................................................................................................. 20
CANNABIS YIELD ........................................................................................................................................ 20
POTENTIAL CANNABIS PRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 23
HASHISH PRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 24
REASONS FOR CULTIVATING CANNABIS.............................................................................................. 26
AGRICULTURAL ASSISTANCE RECEIVED ............................................................................................. 29
ACCESS TO DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES IN THE SURVEYED VILLAGES ....................................... 29
INCOME SOURCES OF THE FARMERS AND CANNABIS CULTIVATION .......................................... 31
CANNABIS CULTIVATING HOUSEHOLDS .............................................................................................. 33
INCOME FROM CANNABIS ........................................................................................................................ 33
CANNABIS TRADING ................................................................................................................................. 35
CANNABIS PRICES....................................................................................................................................... 37
CANNABIS SEIZURES.................................................................................................................................. 40
PAYMENT OF TAX ON CANNABIS (USHER)........................................................................................... 42
FARM-GATE VALUE OF CANNABIS PRODUCTION .............................................................................. 43
3 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................45
SURVEY COMPONENTS.............................................................................................................................. 45
ESTIMATIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 52
4 ANNEX: PICTURES OF CANNABIS FIELDS AT DIFFERENT STAGES, 2009 ..........................57
1
INDEX OF TABLES__________________________________________________________________
Table 1: Provinces cultivating cannabis, 2009 ................................................................................................. 11
Table 2: Cannabis and opium cultivation by province, 2009.......................................................................... 21
Table 3: Average cannabis garda yield by region (kg/ha), 2009..................................................................... 22
Table 4: Potential cannabis resin garda production, 2009.............................................................................. 23
Table 5: Agricultural assistance and cannabis cultivation, 2009 (n=1,634)................................................... 29
Table 6: Farm-gate prices of cannabis garda by region from the monthly price monitoring system
(US$/kg), January 2010 ............................................................................................................................ 37
Table 7: Farm-gate hashish prices as reported by headmen at the time of the survey (US$/kg), 2009....... 39
Table 8: Farm-gate hashish price as proportion of cannabis garda powder price (US$/kg), 2009 ............. 39
Table 9: Hashish seizures in Afghanistan by province (kg), 2007 - 2009....................................................... 41
Table 10: Regional grouping.............................................................................................................................. 53
Table 11: Cannabis resin (garda) yield by region, 2009.................................................................................. 53
Table 12: Cannabis garda production, 2009 .................................................................................................... 53
Table 13: Farm-gate prices of cannabis resin by region (US$/kg), January 2009 ........................................ 54
Table 14: Prices of 2nd and 3rd garda reported by farmers as proportion of 1st garda, 2009 ....................... 54
Table 15: Farm-gate value of garda (lower limit, US$)................................................................................... 54
Table 16: Farm-gate value of garda (upper limit, US$) .................................................................................. 55
Table 17: Gross income from cannabis resin per hectare (US$/ha), 2009 ..................................................... 55
INDEX OF PICTURES________________________________________________________________
Picture 1: Morphological differences between male and female cannabis plants......................................... 10
Picture 2: Cannabis interpretation on satellite image in Sherzad district, Nangarhar province ................ 14
Picture 3: Mature female cannabis plant with resin glands............................................................................ 22
Picture 4: Stages of cannabis garda production............................................................................................... 24
Picture 5: Hashish production by machine ...................................................................................................... 25
Picture 6: Stages of manual hashish preparation from garda powder .......................................................... 26
Picture 7: A surveyor using GPS....................................................................................................................... 49
Picture 8: Cannabis field interpreted from the satellite images ..................................................................... 50
Picture 9: Aerial ground truth collection ......................................................................................................... 51
INDEX OF FIGURES__________________________________________________________________
Figure 1: Change of cannabis cultivation occurrence by region, 2005 - 2009 ............................................... 13
Figure 2: Varieties of cannabis cultivated in different provinces................................................................... 15
Figure 3: Cannabis cropping patterns reported by farmers, 2009 (n=724)................................................... 16
Figure 4: Regional cannabis cropping patterns reported by farmers growing cannabis, 2009 (n=724)..... 16
Figure 5: Years of cannabis cultivation between 2004-2009 reported by cannabis growing farmers in 2009
(n=724) ....................................................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 6: Reasons for cultivating cannabis in 2009 (n = 724 farmers)........................................................... 27
Figure 7: Reasons for stopping cannabis cultivation (n = 1,553 farmers) ..................................................... 27
Figure 8: Conditions for resuming cannabis cultivation in future, reported by farmers who stopped
cultivation (n=1,553 farmers)................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 9: Reason for potentially cultivating cannabis in future as reported by farmers who have never
grown cannabis (n = 2,625 farmers) ........................................................................................................ 28
2
Figure 10: Type of agricultural assistance received reported by headmen (n =1,634 villages) ................... 29
Figure 11: Access to services in the cannabis risk area, 2009 (n = 1,628 villages)......................................... 30
Figure 12: Access to schools and media in the cannabis risk area, by cannabis growing status, 2009........ 30
Figure 13: Sources of 2008 cash income of farmers cultivating cannabis in 2009 ........................................ 31
Figure 14: Sources of 2008 cash income of farmers who stopped cannabis cultivation in 2009 or before.. 32
Figure 15: Sources of 2008 cash income of farmers who never cultivated cannabis as reported in 2009... 32
Figure 16: Coping strategies for the reduced income by stopping cannabis cultivation .............................. 33
Figure 17: Average annual per hectare income from cannabis and opium (US$), 2009 .............................. 34
Figure 18: Comparison of expenditure distribution per hectare of opium and cannabis cultivation, 200935
Figure 19: Farm-gate prices of garda reported by headmen at the time of the survey (US$/kg), 2009 ...... 37
Figure 20: Monthly farm-gate prices of cannabis garda (best quality) by region, Jan. 2006 – Jan. 2010 .. 38
Figure 21: Average annual prices of cannabis products in Pakistan and Afghanistan, 2006-2009............. 39
Figure 22: Farm-gate prices of hashish by region as reported by headmen (US$/kg), 2009........................ 40
Figure 23: Seizures of cannabis resin (hashish) in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan (kg), 2002 - 2009........ 42
Figure 24: Payment of usher in 2008 by region, reported by cannabis farmers in 2009 (n=724)................ 42
Figure 25: Type of usher payment made by cannabis farmers in 2008, (n=508) .......................................... 43
Figure 26: Recipients of usher payment in 2008, reported by cannabis farmers in 2009 (n=508) .............. 43
INDEX OF MAPS
Map 1: Cannabis risk area and selected villages, 2009 ................................................................................... 12

Map 2: Planting dates of cannabis, 2009 .......................................................................................................... 18
Map 3: Harvesting dates of cannabis, 2009 ...................................................................................................... 19
Map 4: Drug trading centres in Afghanistan, 2009 ......................................................................................... 36
Map 5: Sampling frame and selected blocks for the cannabis satellite survey, 2009.................................... 48
3
Commentary by the Executive Director
Afghanistan is the world’s biggest producer of opium. Less known is the fact that 10,000 to 24,000
hectares of cannabis are grown in Afghanistan every year. While other countries have even larger cannabis
cultivation, the astonishing yield of the Afghan cannabis crop (145 kg of resin per hectare as compared to
around 40 kg/ha in Morocco) makes Afghanistan the world’s biggest producer of hashish, estimated at
between 1,500 and 3,500 tons a year.
This first-ever Afghanistan Cannabis Survey is based on survey data from 1,634 villages in 20 provinces. It
shows that there is large-scale cannabis cultivation in exactly half (17 out of 34) of Afghanistan’s
provinces.
Money is one of the main reasons: cannabis reaps a high return. The gross income per hectare of cannabis
(US$ 3,900) is higher than from opium (US$ 3,600). Cannabis does not need much labour cost: in
Afghanistan it is three times cheaper to cultivate a hectare of cannabis than a hectare of opium. As a result,
the net income of a hectare of cannabis is US$ 3,341 compared to US$ 2,005 per hectare of opium. In the
aggregate, however, because opium cultivation far exceeds cannabis cultivation, in 2009 the value of
cannabis resin production in Afghanistan was estimated at between US$ 39-94 million, about 10-20% of
the farm-gate value of opium production.
Like opium, cannabis cultivation is concentrated in regions of instability, namely the south of the country:
actually, two-thirds (67%) of cannabis farmers also grew opium in 2009. Like opium, cannabis cultivation,
production and trafficking are taxed by those who control the territory, providing an additional source of
revenue for insurgents.
The high concentration of cannabis cultivation in southern Afghanistan marks a shift away from the north
which, even five years ago, was the main cannabis-growing region. Illustrative of this trend is the steep
increase in cannabis prices in Balkh province – once notorious for its Mazari (Balki) cannabis – due to a
governor-led crackdown on drug cultivation since 2007.
Like opium, cannabis trading centres are situated throughout the country. While some cannabis is
consumed domestically (as hashish or “charas” as it is known), the main trade flows, so widely
commented, follow opium trafficking routes, particularly around hubs in Balkh, Uruzgan and Kandahar
provinces. Indeed, in 2008 a massive seizure of cannabis – 245,000 kg – was made in Kandahar close to
the border with Pakistan.
This report shows that Afghanistan’s drug problem is even more complex than just the opium trade.
Reducing Afghanistan’s cannabis supply should be dealt with more seriously, as part of the national drug
control strategy. As with opium, the bottom line is to improve security and development in drug-producing
regions in order to wean farmers off of illicit crops and into sustainable, licit livelihoods, and to deny
insurgents another source of illicit income.
Antonio Maria Costa

Executive Director
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
5
Fact Sheet Afghanistan Cannabis Survey 2009
2009
Cannabis cultivation1 10,000 – 24,000 ha

2
Number of provinces without cannabis cultivation 17
Number of provinces with cannabis cultivation 17
First garda: 68 kg/ha
Average cannabis resin powder (garda)3 yield from cannabis Second garda: 46 kg/ha
in mono-crop cultivation Third garda: 30 kg/ha
Total: 145 kg/ha4
Potential cannabis resin powder (garda) production 1,500 – 3,500 mt
Cannabis growing households 40,000 (25,000 - 60,000)
Average cannabis cultivated per cannabis growing household
0.4 ha
Average opium poppy cultivated per opium growing
0.5 ha
households5
Proportion of cannabis farmers who also grew opium in 2009 67%
First Garda: US$ 58/kg
Average farm-gate price of cannabis resin at time of resin
Second Garda: US$ 38/kg
processing (January 2010)
Third Garda: US$ 20/kg
Total farm-gate value of cannabis resin production (all garda US$ 39 – 94 million
qualities)
As % of GDP6 0.4% - 0.9%
Average yearly gross income from cannabis of cannabis
US$ 1,553
growing households
Average yearly gross income from opium of opium growing
US$ 1,786
households
Income from cannabis per ha (gross/net) US$ 3,900 / US$ 3,341
Income from opium per ha (gross/net) US$ 3,600 / US$ 2,005
Income from wheat per ha (gross/net) US$ 1,200 / US$ 960
1
Cannabis cultivation includes cannabis cultivated on fields, typically for commercial purposes. Small-scale
cultivation, e.g. in kitchen gardens, was not covered by this survey.
2
Provinces without cannabis cultivation include 3 provinces, which were surveyed but no cannabis fields were
found, and 14 provinces, which fell outside the cannabis risk area (the 2009 survey area). Field information
gathered in 2008 and 2009 indicated that provinces outside the risk area had no significant cannabis cultivation.
3
Garda is the local term used in Afghanistan for the powder obtained by threshing and sieving the harvested and
dried cannabis plants. This process is repeated several times and results in different quality of garda (first,
second, …). Garda is further processed into hashish, which is the traded product.
4
In southern Afghanistan, some farmers produced fourth garda. As this was not common practice, fourth garda
was subsumed under third garda, here. The total yield differs from sum of gardas due to rounding.
5
Estimated from total area under opium cultivation and number of households involved in opium cultivation.
6
GDP for 2009: US$ 10.7 billion (Afghan fiscal year 2008/2009), source: Gov. of Afghanistan, Central
Statistical Office.
6
KEY FINDINGS
• The total area under cannabis cultivation in 2009 was estimated between 10,000 – 24,000 ha.
Total cannabis resin production was 1,500 - 3,500 mt. This makes Afghanistan the world’s largest
producer of cannabis resin.
• In 2009, cannabis cultivation was found in 17 of the 34 Afghanistan’s provinces. No significant
cannabis cultivation was reported in the remaining 17 provinces.
• The area under cannabis cultivation in 2009 is not comparable with previously indicative
estimates, as this was the first systematic cannabis survey carried out in Afghanistan. However,
auxiliary data such as cannabis prices and seizures do not indicate major changes in the overall
national level of cannabis production since 2006.
• The regional distribution of cannabis cultivation has changed in the last five years. In 2005, the
northern part of Afghanistan had a large share of cannabis cultivation. Between 2005-2009 the
regional centre of cannabis moved to the southern part of the country.
• Cannabis cultivation is geographically associated with opium cultivation and insecurity. Most
cannabis is cultivated in the insecure South of the country where also most of the opium is
produced. Over two thirds of cannabis farmers also cultivated opium in 2009.
• Gross income from cannabis (US$ 3,900/ha) cultivation equalled or exceeded income from opium
(US$ 3,600/ha). Due to lower expenditure for harvesting cannabis, net income from cannabis is
higher than net income from opium by 66%.
• The high sale price of cannabis and the relatively low costs of cultivation were the most frequently
mentioned reasons for cultivating cannabis.
• The government ban on cannabis cultivation and religion were the most frequently mentioned
reasons for having stopped cannabis cultivation.
• Farm-gate prices of cannabis resin powder (garda) vary considerably across regions, probably
reflecting differences in quality (proportion of resin to plant material) as well as other factors such
as the degree of supply and demand.
• Overall, cannabis prices in Afghanistan have been relatively stable since 2006 when price
monitoring started. However, some regions have experienced strong price movements.
• Most cannabis farmers, and almost all in the south, reported paying the informal usher tax on
cannabis.
• In Afghanistan, cannabis is a ‘summer’ crop. The planting season of cannabis is between April
and June and harvesting is done between October and January.
• The yield of cannabis resin powder (garda) of 145 kg/ha exceeds by far the yield found in
Morocco in 20057.
• Cannabis is mainly cultivated as a mono crop but some farmers also cultivate cannabis mixed with
other crops or on the edges of fields. Most cannabis fields are irrigated.
7
Royaume du Maroc/UNODC (2005): Maroc. Enquête sur le cannabis 2005. Janvier 2007.
7
1 INTRODUCTION
Evidence from cannabis resin seizures have long pointed to Afghanistan as one of the main producer of the
drug, similar in magnitude only to Morocco. Information collected by UNODC and the Ministry of
Counter Narcotics (MCN) on cannabis cultivation in past years with specific studies8 and during the
Annual Opium Poppy Surveys, confirmed the existence of cannabis cultivation in many provinces of
Afghanistan. However, a systematic survey to precisely estimate the area under cannabis cultivation and
production, was never undertaken before 2009.
Previous attempts to estimate cannabis cultivation in Afghanistan were based on assumed seizure rates and
yield information from other countries. This information indicated the existence of several tens of
thousands of hectares of cannabis cultivation.
New research is presented in this report, based on a survey with village level interviews with farmers and
headmen, yield studies and satellite image interpretation.
The survey benefitted from the experiences and results of a pre-study done in November 20089. The main
village survey with headmen and farmers interviews was implemented between July and September 2009.
The complex area of cannabis resin yield was investigated with focus group interviews in over 45 villages,
the information from headmen and farmers given during the village survey, and a yield observation study
undertaken in January 2010, when the actual resin production from the 2009 cannabis harvest took place.
The cannabis area was estimated based on the interpretation of 128 very high resolution satellite images.
The investigation of cannabis cultivation and production is in many ways more complicated than opium
poppy. The amount of small-scale cannabis cultivation in kitchen gardens and on the bunds of fields is
difficult to quantify. The fact that in some provinces cannabis is intercropped with licit crops makes the
interpretation of satellite images as well as responses from farmers difficult. The volatile situation in
southern Afghanistan made the collection of ground truth information to support the satellite image
analysis difficult in many and impossible in some areas. Partly, surrogate information could be obtained
from overflights.
The 2009 cannabis survey was the first of its kind and was implemented under extremely difficult
circumstances, which even led to the tragic loss of the life of one of the surveyors.
The cannabis survey has been implemented with the technical framework of UNODC Illicit Crop
Monitoring Programme (ICMP) under AD/AFG/F98 project. The objective of ICMP of UNODC is to
assist the international community in monitoring the extent and evolution of illicit crops within the context
of the Political Declaration and Plan of Action on International Cooperation towards an Integrated and
Balanced Strategy to Counter the World Drug Problem, adopted by Member States in 2009. 10
8
E.g. UNODC (2004): Concise Report on Hashish Cultivation in Afghanistan. July 2004.
9
MCN/UNODC (2008): Information on cannabis cultivation in Afghanistan. Internal report. December 2008
10
E/2009/28, E/CN.7/2009/12, Political Declaration and Plan of Action on International Cooperation towards an
Integrated and Balanced Strategy to Counter the World Drug Problem.
9
Botanical information on the cannabis plant11:

Cannabis also known as “marijuana” or “marihuana” is a plant under the Cannabaceae family. It is a
dioecious plant, which means that the male and female flowers develop on separate plants, although
monoecious examples with both sexes on one plant are also found. The development of branches
containing flowering organs varies greatly between male and female plants: the male flowers hang in
long, loose, multi-branched, clustered limbs up to 30 centimeters (12 inches) long and shed their pollen
and die several weeks prior to seed ripening on the female plant, whilst the female flowers are tightly
crowded between small leaves. The female plants tend to be shorter and have more branches than the male
ones. Female plants are leafy to the top with many leaves surrounding the flowers, while male plants have
fewer leaves near the top with few if any leaves along the extended flowering limbs and can produce
hundreds of seeds. Stems are erect, green and hollow and longitudinally grooved. It has been noted that
the height of cannabis plant has gone up to 1-3 meters in different parts of Afghanistan. The maturation of
Cannabis is normally annual and its timing is influenced by the age of the plant, changes in photo-period,
and other environmental conditions.
Flowering:
It usually starts when darkness exceeds eleven hours per day. The flowering cycle lasts around four and
twelve weeks depending on the environmental conditions.
Harvesting:
Since resin secretion and associated terpenoid and cannabinoid biosynthesis are at their peak just after the
pistils have begun to turn brown but before the calyx stops growing, it seems obvious that floral clusters
should be harvested during this time. The floral clusters are responsible for the production of seeds, drugs,
and aromatic resins.
Yield:
Yield varies depending on techniques of yield processing techniques avail in different regions in the
country. The product of the yield is known as “hashish” or “charas” in local language. Depending on the
technique of processing, the names are given to the product. The Mazari or Balkhi variety processing is
different than the processing technique of other varieties particularly in north and east Afghanistan.
Picture 1: Morphological differences between male and female cannabis plants
Cannabis female plant in Dand district, Kandahar Cannabis male plant with flower buds (Kandahar)
province
11
. Information from David T. Brown (1998): Cannabis, the Genus Cannabis. Amsterdam; Robert C.
Clarke (1981): Marijuana Botany. Oakland; and from UNODC internal reports on cannabis in
Afghanistan.
10
2 FINDINGS
The 2009 cannabis survey covered the “cannabis risk area” in Afghanistan, i.e. 20 provinces, where
cannabis cultivation had been observed or reported in other surveys in the past. Field information from the
other 14 provinces indicated that cannabis cultivation did either not exist or only at insignificant levels.
Although the 2009 cannabis survey did not have complete national coverage, it is believed that it covered
the areas where cannabis is mainly cultivated. The main components of the survey were a socio-economic
survey conducted in 1,634 villages in 20 provinces of Afghanistan, which included an interview with the
headman of the village plus individual interviews with 3 farmers per village, and the analysis of 128 high
resolution satellite images. For the purpose of the 2009 cannabis survey, cannabis cultivation was defined
as cannabis cultivated on fields. Small-scale cultivation e.g. in kitchen gardens, flower pots, along the
walls of compounds or “wild cannabis” etc. was not covered by this survey.
Cannabis cultivation
Cannabis cultivation in Afghanistan in 2009 ranged from 10,000 ha to 24,000 ha. Due to the uncertainties
associated with the area estimates, a mid-point estimate was not calculated. This area estimate is not
comparable with previous, indicative estimates released for the years 2005 to 2007. Cannabis cultivation
was found to be much lower than opium cultivation, which in 2009 amounted to 123,000 ha.
The estimation methodology did not allow to produce cannabis area estimates at province level with
sufficient accuracy, although over two thirds of cannabis cultivation in 2009 was estimated to be in the
Southern region. By and large this strong regional disparity with a concentration in the south reflects the
current pattern of opium cultivation but cannabis was also found in poppy-free provinces.
Among the 20 provinces of the cannabis risk area, 17 had cannabis cultivation. In 3 provinces surveyed
(Bamyan, Kunduz, Sari Pul), no cannabis fields were found, neither on satellite images nor during the
village survey. The 14 provinces outside the cannabis risk area were considered to be without cannabis
cultivation as defined for this survey as field information from survey activities in 2008 and 2009 did not
indicated the existence of significant cannabis cultivation.
Table 1: Provinces cultivating cannabis, 2009
Region Province
Logar
Central
Paktya
Eastern Nangarhar
Badakhshan
North-eastern
Takhar
Balkh
Baghlan
Northern
Faryab
Jawzjan
Hilmand
Kandahar
Southern
Uruzgan
Zabul
Badghis
Farah
Western
Hirat
Nimroz
Total 17
No cannabis cultivation was found in Bamyan, Kunduz and Sari Pul provinces.
11
Map 1: Cannabis risk area and selected villages, 2009
12
TA J I K I S T A N
U Z B E K I S TA N
TU RKM EN ISTAN
Cultivation trends
Badakhshan
Jawzjan
Kunduz
Balkh Takhar
Faryab Samangan
Baghlan
Sari Pul
Panjshir
Nuristan
Badghis
Bamyan Parwan Kapisa
Kunar
Laghman
Kabul
Wardak
Legend
Nangarhar
Hirat Logar
Ghor Selected villages
Day kundi
Paktiya
Sampling frame
Ghazni Khost
Provincial boundary
Uruzgan International boundary
Farah Paktika Disricts boundary
Zabul
PA K I S T A N
Hilmand Kandahar
IRAN
Nimroz
0 75 150 300
Km
Geographic projection: WGS 84
results with previous, tentative figures. Previous attempts to estimate cannabis cultivation in Afghanistan
were based on assumed seizure rates and yield information from other countries. However, the 2009
As the 2009 Afghanistan cannabis survey was the first of its kind, it is not possible to compare the 2009
Source: MCN - UNODC A fgh anistan Cann abis Su rve y 2009
survey showed that conditions in Afghanistan allow much higher cannabis resin yields than known from
other countries, namely Morocco, where UNODC and the Government of Morocco have undertaken area
and yield surveys in the years 2003 to 2005. Thus, the results of the 2009 cannabis survey support previous
assumptions made on the volume of cannabis resin production but presents a much lower area estimate.
During the Annual Opium Surveys 2005 to 2009, information was collected on farmers’intention to
cultivate cannabis in that year. The village level interviews were conducted during the opium cultivation
period (spring) and before cannabis, a summer crop, was planted. Thus, farmers could still change their
decision on the cannabis cultivation. Furthermore, the existence of cannabis cultivation could not be
verified by the surveyors during the opium surveys, since the crop was not yet visible on the fields.
Between 2005 and 2009, only a small proportion of the surveyed villages reported cannabis cultivation and
this limited the reliability of the information collected. An accurate area estimate of cannabis cultivation
could not be made with this information.
Despite these limitations, some conclusions can be drawn from the cannabis trends observed during
interviews done for the opium poppy survey:
• During the period under review (2005-2009), the proportion of villages reporting cannabis
cultivation was always much smaller than the proportion of opium cultivating villages. Typically,
the samples showed about four times more opium cultivating than cannabis cultivating villages.
• The reported average cannabis growing area per village was between one third and half of opium
cultivation area.
• The lower proportion of cannabis cultivating villages and the smaller amount of cannabis
cultivated per village compared to opium cultivation, indicate that the level of cannabis cultivation
in the years 2005 to 2008 was well below the level of opium cultivation in the same period.
• The proportion of villages in the sample reporting cannabis cultivation in the Southern region has
dramatically increased since 2005, while the number of cannabis cultivating villages in the
Northern region decreased correspondingly. This indicates a strong reduction of cannabis
cultivation in the north. Due to the low number of cannabis villages found in all years, it is
difficult to judge whether the increase in the south was only proportional or indicates an increase
in cannabis cultivation in absolute terms.
Figure 1: Change of cannabis cultivation occurrence by region, 2005 - 2009
Cannabis villages in AOPS as % of total villages
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Central Eastern Northeastern Northern Southern Western
Source: Annual Opium Poppy Surveys 2005-2009
13
Picture 2: Cannabis interpretation on satellite image in Sherzad district, Nangarhar province
14
Cannabis varieties
Two distinct varieties of cannabis were reported in the 2009 cannabis survey - one with a pink red stem
and the other with a green stem. The plant with pink red stalk reportedly produces higher quality resin and
is in higher demand than the green stem type. There are many local names given to different varieties of
cannabis in different parts of the region. Azraki Shadani, Kharwari Shadani, Logari Shadani, Machalghu
Shadani, Surkhabi Shadani, Watani, Kharwari, Kandahari, Bangi Herati, Sorkhbandi Shindandi, Spera
botay, Chagali and Mazari are the names reported by farmers during the survey. The most popular
cannabis variety in Afghanistan reported was the Mazari variety (58%).
Watani is the most commonly cultivated cannabis variety in Nangarhar. Other varieties cultivated in the
Eastern region are Azraki Shadani, Logari Shadani and Machalghu Shadani. In the Central region, most
cultivated varieties are Azraki Shadani, Kharwari Shadani, Logari shadani and Macalghu Shadani. In
Northern region, mostly Mazari variety is cultivated whereas in the North–eastern region the popular
varieties are Kharwari shadani, Logari shadani, Machalghu shadai and Mazari. In the Southern region,
Mazari, Kandahari and Spera botay (Brown Bush) varieties are cultivated. In the Western region, Azraki
Shadani, Bangi Hirati, Sabz bangi, Kharwari Shadani, Sreh charas and Mazari varieties are cultivated.
Figure 2: Varieties of cannabis cultivated in different provinces
Mazari (Balkhi) variety 58%
W atani 7%
Machalghu Shadani 6%
Kharwari Shadani 5%
Sabz Bang 5%
Azraki Shadani 5%
Logari Shadani 5%
Sreh chars 4%
Surkhabi Shadani 2%
Bangi Hirati 1%
Kandahari 1%
Unknown 1%
Spera Botay 0.5%
Chaghali tokhom 0.2%
0% 30% 60%
Cannabis Cultivation pattern

Cannabis is cultivated as a summer crop after for example wheat or poppy which are winter crops. It is an
annual plant and has to be planted every year afresh. In Afghanistan, cannabis is mainly grown as a mono-
crop, but also mixed cropping patterns exist. In addition, cannabis is grown along the field boundaries,
which are often elevated in the form of small dykes called “bunds” due to the necessity to irrigate the field.
72% of the farmers who grew cannabis, cultivated it as a mono-crop. 20% cultivated cannabis as a mono-
cropping in addition to mixed crop and/or on bunds. Only 8% of cannabis farmers had cannabis only as
mixed cropping or on field bunds. The results indicate that mono-cropping cannabis is the predominant
cultivation technique, although farmers’ interviews can not provide a precise estimate of the proportion of
mono-crop cannabis within the total area under cannabis cultivation.
15
Figure 3: Cannabis cropping patterns reported by farmers, 2009 (n=724)
Mixed only Mixed and on On bunds only

2% bunds 2%
Mono, mixed, and 4%
on bunds
4%
Mono and on
bunds
5%
Mono and mixed

11%
Mono only
72%
Significant regional differences in cannabis cropping patterns were observed. In the southern, eastern and
central part of the country (S-E-C region), almost all farmers reported mono-cropping of cannabis, some of
them in addition to other cropping patterns (mixed, on bunds). In the rest of the country, about 30% of
farmers did not report mono-crop cannabis at all. Some farmers reported cultivating cannabis exclusively
on the bunds of their fields.
Figure 4: Regional cannabis cropping patterns reported by farmers growing cannabis, 2009 (n=724)
100%
90%
80% Cannabis cultivation type

% of cannabis farmers
70% On bunds only

60% Mixed and on bunds
Mixed only
50%
Mono, mixed, and on bunds
40% Mono and on bunds
30% Mono and mixed
Mono only
20%
10%
0%
N-NE-W S-E-C
Region
Cannabis is often cultivated as mixed crop to protect other crops from insects but also to disguise the illicit
cultivation. Crops mixed with cannabis include fodder, barley, maize, cotton, peanuts, sesame, tobacco,
vegetables (carrot, okra, potatoes, tomatoes, cucumber, onion, eggplant). Fruits like melon and watermelon
are also grown in combination with cannabis. The mixed cultivation of cannabis is most common in Balkh,
Faryab, Paktya and Takhar. In Nangarhar, farmers grew cannabis mixed with maize but about one month
after planting, the maize plants were cut to be used as fodder. For the purpose of the survey, this
16
cultivation pattern was considered to be mono-cropping. In Balkh, cannabis cultivation is often combined
with cotton.
As with any seasonal crops, cultivation on bunds is often done for personal use. In such field surrounded
by cannabis, farmers grow cotton, okra and other vegetables like carrot, cucumber, mung-bean etc. In
Badghis and Jawzjan provinces, and to some extent in Logar cannabis was often cultivated on bunds.
Cannabis cultivation frequency
Farmers who grew cannabis in 2009 (n=724) were asked if they had also cultivated cannabis in the
previous five years (since 2004). Only a small proportion of farmers (2%) were new cannabis farmers, i.e.
they had started cannabis cultivation in 2009, whereas over half of the cannabis farmers had cultivated
cannabis in 3 or more years since 2004. Strong differences were found between farmers in the Southern
region and other regions. In the south, 44% of cannabis farmers grew cannabis every single year since
2004, but in other regions this was true for only 7% of cannabis farmers. Two thirds of farmers in the south
who cultivated cannabis in 2009 had cultivated the crop four times or more in the last 6 years. In other
regions, this was true for less than a quarter of farmers. In the south, about a third of farmers cultivated
cannabis sporadically (every second year or less) in the last six years, whereas in other regions, a large
majority (75%) grew cannabis sporadically.
This indicates that in the Southern region, cannabis cultivation is a more permanent feature of the
agricultural portfolio of households than in other regions. It also suggests that cannabis cultivation might
be easier to be substituted in other regions as households choose to cultivate cannabis only once in a while
and seem to have other options when they do not cultivate cannabis. It is possible that the regional shift of
cannabis cultivation observed since 2005 is to some extent the result of an intensification in the south
(farmers growing cannabis more often, growing cannabis in most years instead of sporadically) and a
corresponding cut-back in the north (farmers growing less often, enlarging intervals between years in
which they grow cannabis).
Figure 5: Years of cannabis cultivation between 2004-2009 reported by cannabis growing farmers in 2009
(n=724)
100%
7%
90%
17%
80% 44%
70%
60%
50%
24%
40% 69%
30%
20%
32%
10%
6%
0% 1%
Other regions Southern region
Started 2009 2009 and 1 or 2 more years since 2004

2009 and 3 or 4 more years 2009 and every year since 2004
17
18
Map 2: Planting dates of cannabis, 2009
63° E 66° E 69° E 72° E 75° E
U Z B E K I S TA N Shi ki Da rwa z-i P ayi n (m am ay)

Da rwa z-i - Bal a (n es ay)
Kuf Ab
Khw ah a n
TAJIKISTAN
Ra gh ista n Shi gh na n
Ya wa n
Da rqa d Ch ah ab Koh ista n
Ya ng i Qa la Sha hr i Bu zurg
Kha mya b Qa rq in
Sho rTe pa Sha hr ak-i -H ai rata n Da shti Qal a Ya fta l-i -Su flaArgh a nj K hw ah
Kha ni Ch ah ar Bag h Shu ha d a
Kal da r Ha zra ti Im am S ah ib Ru staq
Min ga ji k Mar dya n Do wl at ab ad Argo Bah ar ak
T U R K ME N I S TA N Qu rg ha n Qa la -i -Zal Da shti -i-A rchi Khw aj a Gh ar Badakhshan
Khw aj ah Du Ko h Kha sh Wa kh an
Bal kh
And kh oy Bah ar ak Kal afg an Da ray im Esh kash im
Qa ra m Qul Na hr-i -Sh ah i Khu lmKunduz
Jawzjan Balkh Kish im Tash ka n Jurm Wa rd oo j
She be rg ha n (Pr ovi nc ia l Ce nte r) Fa iz ab ad Ch ah ar D ar ah
Takhar
De hd ad i Mar mul Kha na b ad
Do wl at ab ad Fa yro z Na kh che e r Ban gi

Ch imta l Ali Ab ad Ch al Fa rkh ar Tag ab
Ch ah ar Ke n t Ha zra t-i -Su lta n Ya mg an Za yb ak
Esh kam ish Na ma k Ab
Sho lg ar ah Bag hl an -i- Jad ee d
Shi rin Tag ab Sari Pul (Pro vin ci al C en ter) Fi rin g w a Gh aru
Qu sh Tep ah Ayba k (Pro vi nci al Ce nte r)
Say yad Burk a Khw aj ah Hi jra n (J al ga h)
Faryab Da rah -i- Suf-i -Pa yin Khu ra m wa Sar B ag h
Soz ma Qa la Go za rga h -i-N oo r Wa rsa j
Alm ar Sar- i-Po l Kish in de h Na hre en
Mai ma na h
36° N
36° N
Pas htun Ko t
Bil C h ira gh San gc ha rak Za ri Samangan Kho st wa Fi rin g Kira n w a Mu n ja n
Go sfa nd i Da ha na -i- Gh ur i De h Sa la h
Barg -i -Ma ta l
Gh o rma ch Pul -i-H is ar
Qa is ar Gu rzi wa n
Da rah -i- Soo f-i-B al aRo i-D o- Ab
And ar ab Pary an Legend
Sari Pul Baghlan Du shi
Bal a Mu rg ha b Khi nj an Kam de sh
Koh ista na t Bal kha b Panjshir Man do l plantin_dates
Koh ista n Kah ma rd Du Ab Nu rista n Pa ro on ( Pro vin cia l C en ter)
Tal ah wa B arfa k Sal an gShu tul
Da rah Na ri
Gu lr an Muq ur Shi nw ar i Un ab a Wa yg al No data
Nuristan
Ni jra b Gh a zi Aba d
Badghis Ch ah ar Sa d ah Sai gh an
No or Gra m Da ra-i -Pe ch Da ng am
Kus hk (R ab at-i -Sa ng i) Jaw an d Ya ka wl an g April
Ab Ka ma ri She ba r Shi ga l w a Sh el tan
Parwan Kapisa Ali she ng Ali ng ar
Kus k-i-K oh na h Bam yan (Pro vin ci al C en ter) Sha ykh Al i Estal ef Bag ra m
Kunar
Qa la -i -No w (P rovi nc ia l Ce n te r) Qa d is Sar Ka n i
Ch ag hc ha ran (Pro vin cia l C en ter) Surk h-i -Pa rsa Gu la ra Koh -i- Safi Tag ab April/May
Bamyan Laghman Pag hm an De hSa b z No or g al Ch ow ke y
Koh sa n La l wa Sa rja ng al Kha s Ku na r July
Karr ukh Do wl atya r Hi sah -i- Awa l Be hs ud Jal rez
Kabul Qa rg ha ye e Kam a
Enj il Ch ii sht-i -Sh ari f Suru b i Beh su d Go sh ta
Pan ja b Mar kaz- i- Be hsu d Kab ul Mus ah i Jun
Ze n da h Ja n Hi rat Ob e La lp oo r
Wardak Ne rkh Kha k-i -Jab a r He sar ak Khu gy an i Ro da t
She rza d Jun/July
Gh o ryan Hirat Pas htun Zarg hu n Sha hr ak San g- i-Ta kh t Wa ra s Da imi rd ad Shi nw ar
Do L a in ah Nangarhar Azra Du r Bab a
Ni iza m-i -Sh ah id ( Gu za rah ) Ish tarl ay Logar Ch ak- i-War da k
Tu la k Ghor Jaj i
De h Ba la Kot Ach in Na zya n March
Khe di r Say yid ab ad Pul -i-A la m Kho sh i Pac hir w a ga m
Fe rsi MirA mo r Jag ha tu
Day Kundi Na wu r Ch ark h Sam kan i March/April
Ra shi da n Kha rw ar Jaj i Ma id an
Adra ska n Ni li (P rovi nc ia l Ce nte r) Sha hr istan Paktya
Pas ab an d Za n akh an Ahm ad ab ad Bak March/April/May
Sag ha r Kiti Ajri stan Bah ra m-e S ha hi d (Ja gh a tu )
Tayw a ra Wa gh a z De h Yak Kho st Matu n (P rovi nc ia l Ce nte r)
Gi za b Khost Zu rma t Shw ak Tera yza i (Al i Sh er ) March/April/May/Jun
Mal ista n And ar Mata K ha n Wo za J ad ran
Shi nd an d
Pur C ha ma n
Kaj ran Ghazni Zi ru kSpe ra Tan ay Gu rb uz March/July
Jag hu ri Qa ra B ag h
Gi ro Sar R ow za
Ana r Da ra h Ch ora h Kha s Ur uzg an March/May
Sha hi di Ha sa s Muq ur Yo suf Kh el Urg un Gi ya n
33° N
33° N
Bag hr an Kak ar Ka k-e Afg ha n Ab Ba nd Om na

Kha k-i -Sa fe d Bal a Bu lu k Uruzgan Za rg hu n Sh ah r Suru b i March/May/Jun
Ge la n Barm al
Gu li stan Di hra wu d Jan i Kh el
Da ych op an Di la h wa Kh wo sh ama nd May
Pus htRo d Ti rin K ot (Pro vi nci al C e nter )
No wza d Mus a Qal aKaj aki Argh a nd ab Sha h Jo i
Qa la -i -Kah Farah Ne sh Miya Ne sh in
Paktika May/July
Na wa Go ma l
Fa ra h (Pro vi nci al Ce nte r) Bak wa h
Na w Ba ha r Wa za hkh w ah May/Jun
Wa sh er San gi n Qa la
Zabul Miza n
Shi b Ko h Sha h Wa li Ko t Qa la t (Pro vin cia l C en ter)
De la ram Gh o rak Kha kre z International boundaries
Tarn ak w a J al da k Shi nka i Tu rwo Wo r Ma ma y
Na he r-i- Sar aj She me l za i
Argh a nd ab Prov incial boundaries
La sh-i -Ju wa yn Atgh ar
Kha sh R o d Na d Ali Zh ir e
Mai wa n d
La shk arg ah (Pro vin ci al C en ter) Kan da h ar (Pr ovi ncl al Ce nte r)
Argh is ta n Bagram Watahpoor
Mar uf AlaSai Chapa Dara Dara-i-Pech
Na wa -i- Baru kza i Tagab Alisheng Alingar Mara warah
Kan g Eastern region Chowkey Sar Kani
Asl- i-C ha kh an sur Spi n Bo ld ak
Darah-i- NoorNoor gal
Hilmand Pan jw ay ee DehSabz Mehtar Lam (Provincial Center)
Khas Kunar
IRAN Za ra nj ( Prov in cia l C en te r) Kandahar Qarghayee Kuzkunar
Bagrami Surubi
Ga rm S er PA K I S TA N Goshta
Da ma n Behsud
Nimroz Surkh Rud Kama
Hesarak Lalpoor
Rodat
Sherzad Khugyani Mohmand Dara
Azra Kot Shinwar
Pachir wagamDeh Bala Dur Baba
AchinNazyan
Ch ah ar Bu rj ak Sho ra ba k Khoshi Jaji
Re g-i -Kh an Ni shi n Re g
Laja Ahmad Khel Dand Patan
30° N
30° N
Di shu 0 50 100 200 300 Samkani
km Jani Khel Jaji Maidan

Sabari (Yaqubi)Bak
Geographic ProjectionDatum: WGS 84
NadirShah Kot
INDIA
Woza Jadran Terayzai (Ali Sher)
Khost Matun (Provincial Center)
63° E 66° E 69° E E Gurbuz
Spera72°Tanay 75° E
Map 3: Harvesting dates of cannabis, 2009
63° E 66° E 69° E 72° E 75° E
U Z B E K I S TA N Shi ki Da rwa z-i P ayi n (ma ma y)

Da rwa z-i - B al a (n esa y)
Kuf A b
Khw ah an TA JI K I S T A N
Ra gh ista n
Shi gh na n
Ya wa n
Da rqa d Ch ah ab Koh ista n
Ya ng i Qa la Sha hri Buz urg
Kha mya b Qa rq in
T U R K M E N I S TA N Sho rTe pa Sha hra k-i -Ha ira tan Da shti Qa la Ya fta l-i -Su fl a Argh an j Kh w ah
Kha ni Ch ah arB ag h Shu ha da
Kal da r Ha zrati Ima m Sa hi b Ru staq Argo
Qu rg ha n Min ga ji k Mard ya n Do wl at ab ad Bah ara k Wa kh an
Khw aj a Gh ar
Khw aj ah Du Ko h Aqch a hCh ah ar Bo la k Da shti -i-Ar chi Kha sh
Balkh Qa la -i- Za l Kal afg an Da rayi m
And kh oy Bal kh Na hr-i -Sh ah i Kunduz Bah ara k Eshk ash im
Qa ra m Qul Kha na qa Takh ar Kish im Jurm
Khu lm Tash ka n Wa rdo o j
Fa iz ab ad Khan
She be rg ha n (Pro vin ci al C en ter) De hd ad i Marm ul Ch ah ar D ara h
Abad Ban gi Tal oq an (Pro vin cia l C en te r) Ba da ksha n
Do wl at ab ad Ch imta l Fa yro z Na kh che er Ali Ab ad Kha na ba d
Ja wzja n Ch al Fa rkh ar Tag ab
Ch ah ar Ke nt Ha zrat-i -Su ltan Ya mg an Za yb ak
Eshk ami sh Na mak Ab
Sari Pul (Pro vin cia l C en te r) Sho lg ara h Bag hl an -i-J ad ee d
Farya b Ayba k (Pro vin ci al C en ter) Fi rin g w a Gh aru
Shi rin Tag ab Qu sh Tep ah Burk a Khw aj ah Hi jra n (Ja lg ah )
Sayy ad Da rah -i-S uf-i -Pay in Pul -i-K hu mri (P rovi nc ial Ce nte r)
Sozm a Qa la Go za rga h- i-N oo r Wa rsa j
Alma r Sar- i-Po l Kish in de h Khu ram wa S ar Ba gh Na hre en
Mai ma na h
36° N
36° N
Bil C hi ra gh San gc ha rak Za ri Kho st wa Fi rin g Kira n w a Mu nj an

Pash tun Kot Go sfan d i Da ha na -i- Gh uri
Gh o rmac h De h Sa la h Barg -i- Mata l
Da rah -i-S oo f-i-Ba la Samangan Ba gh lan
Gu rzi wa n Pary an
Qa is ar Ro i-D o-A b Nu rista n Pa roo n (P rovi nci al Ce nte r)
Sa ri P ul Du shi And ara b Pul -i-H is ar
Bal a Mu rgh a b Kam de sh
Koh ista na t Bal kha b Khi nj an His sa- i-Aw al (Kh in j) Man do l
Koh ista n Kah ma rd
Badghis Tal ah w a B arfa k Sal an g Panjsher Nuristan Na ri
Shu tul Da rah Du Ab
Gu lr an Muq ur Shi nw ari Wa ma Wa yg al Gh a zi Aba d
Ch ah ar Sa da h Sai gh an Jabalus s araj
Jaw an d Syah g ird (Gh or ba nd ) Chaharik ar Nij ra bAla Sai No or Gra m Ch ap a D ara Shi ga l w a Sh el ta n
Kush k (R ab at-i -San gi ) Ya ka wl an g She ba r Pa rwa n Bag ram Ali ng ar Da ng am
Kusk -i-K oh na h Ab Ka ma ri Sha ykh Al i
Kapisa Kunar
Guldara
Qa la -i- No w (Pr ovi nci al C e nter ) Qa d is Ba myan Koh -i-S afiTag ab Laghman Da ra-i -Pe chSar Ka ni
Ch ag hch ar an ( Prov in cia l Ce n te r) Surk h-i -Pa rsa Ch ow key
Bam yan (Pro vin cia l C en te r) Pag hm an De hSa bz Ali she ng No or g al
Koh sa n Enj il La l wa Sar jan g al Kabul
Karr ukh Do wl atya r His ah -i-A wa l Be hsu d Jal rez Kab ul
Surobi Qa rg ha yee Kam aKha s Ku na r
Hirat Ch iis ht-i- Sha rif Pan ja b Mark az-i - Be hsu d
Mus ah i Suru bi Beh su d Go sh ta
Ob e Da imi rda d Nirk hMuh am ma d A gh ah Surk h Ru d La lp oo r
Ze nd a h Ja n Hir at He sara k Ro da t
Ne rkh Kha k-i -Jab ar Khu gy an i Legend
Gh o ryan Pash tun Za rg hu n Do L ai na h San g-i -Ta kht Wardak Kot Shi nw ar
Wa ras Azra Azra She rza d
Sha hra k Ch ak-i -Ward ak Du r Bab a
Nii za m-i- Sha hi d (Gu zar ah ) Tu la k Ghor Ish tarl ay Lo ga r Jaji Jaj i
Nangarhar Harvest Calendar
Khe di r Sayy id ab ad Barak i B arak De h Ba la Achi n Na zya n
Fe rsi Uruzgan Jag ha tu Ch arkh Pul -i-A la m Lij a Mangal Sam kan i
Nil i (Pr ovi nci al Ce nter ) MirA mor Na wu r Chakm ani Da nd P ata n
No Data
Sha hri stan Ra shi da n Kha rw ar
Adra ska n Jani K hel Jaj i Ma id an
Pasa b an d Zana Khan December
Sag ha r Kiti Ajri stan Bah ram -e Sh ah id (Ja gh atu) Musa K hel
Bak
Tayw a ra De h Yak Paktya Shw ak
Gi za b Wa gh az Nadir Shah K Sab ari (Yaq ub i) November
Mal ista n And ar Zu rma t Nik a
Mando Z ay i Tera yza i (Al i Sh er)
Shi nd an d Kaj ran Gh azn i Mata K ha n Zi ruk Kh ost Gu rb uzKho st Matu n (Pro vi nci al C en ter)
Pur C ha ma n Jag hu ri Qa ra B ag h
October
Gi ro Sar R ow za Spe ra Tan ay
Ana r Da rah Bag hra n Kha s Uru zg an Yo suf Kh el Urg un Gi ya n October/November
Sha hi di H a sas Ch ora h Muq ur
33° N
33° N
Kaka r Ka k-e Afgh an Ab Ba nd Om na

Kha k-i -Safe d Bal a Bu lu k Za rg hu n Sh ah r Suru bi September
Ti rin K ot (Pro vin cia l C en ter) Ge la n
Gu li stan Jan i Kh el Barm al
Dih ra wu d Da ych op an Argh an d ab
Push tRo d Sha h Jo i
Dil ah wa Khw o sha ma nd Go ma l Provincial boundaries
Qa la -i- Kah No wza d Mus a Qal aKaj aki
Ne sh Miya Ne sh in Zabul Pa kti ka
Na wa International boundaries
Fa ra h (Pro vin ci al C en ter) Fara h Qa la t ( Prov in cia l Ce n te r) Wa za hkh wa h
Bakw a h Miza n Na w Ba ha r
Shi b Ko h Wa sh er San gi n Qa la Sha h Wal i Ko t District Boundaries
De la ram Gh o rak Kha kre z
Tarn ak w a Ja ld ak Shi nka i Tu rwo Wo r Ma may
Na he r-i-S ara j She me l za i
Koh Ban d Man d ol Wa ma Bar K un ar (As ma r)
La sh-i -Ju wa yn Argh an d ab Atgh ar Say yid K he l Ni jra b Do wl at Sh ah No or Gra m Wa tah po or Da ng am
Kha sh R od Na d Ali Zh ire
Mai wa nd Kandarhar Ch ap a D ara Da ra- i-Pe ch Shi ga l w a Sh el tan
La shka rg ah ( Prov in cia l Ce n te r) Bag ra m
Eastern region Ala Sa i
Kan da ha r (Pro vin cl al C en ter) Argh is ta n Maru f Laghman Mar a wa ra h
Qa ra Bag h Ali she ng Ali ng ar Na ran g w a Ba d il
Na wa -i-B aru kza i Tag ab
Kan g Koh -i- Safi Ch ow ke ySar K an i
Asl-i -C ha kha ns ur
Kapisa Da rah -i- N o or No or g al
Hilma nd Pan jw ay ee De hS ab z
Meh tar L am ( Pro vin cia l C en ter)
Kunar
Kha s Ku na r
Spi n Bo ld ak
Za ra nj (P rovi nc ia l Ce nte r) Nimroz PA K IS TA N Kuz kun ar
IRAN Ga rm Se r Da man Kabul
Kab ul Suru b i Qa rg ha ye e
Bag ra mi Go sh ta
Beh su d
Kam a
Kha k-i -Ja ba r Surk h R ud
La lp oo r
Mus ah i He sar ak Ch ap arh a r Ro da t Bati K ot
Khu gy an i
Muh a mma d Ag ha h She rza d Shi nw ar Moh ma nd Da ra
Kot
Ch ah ar Bu rja k Sho rab a k Logar Azra Pac hi r w a ga mDe h Ba la Du r Bab a
Re g-i -Kh an N is hi n Re g Ach in Na zya n
Kho sh i Nangarhar
Jaj i
30° N
30° N
Dis hu 0 50 100 200 300 Paktiya

Pul -i-A la m La ja Ah ma d Kh el Da nd Pata n
km Ahm ad ab ad Sam kan i
Khost
Say yid K ara m Jan i Kh el
Geographic Projection Datum: WGS 84 Jaj i Ma id an
Mus a Kh el (Ma ng al )
Sab ar i (Yaq ub i)Bak
Shw a k Qa la n da r
19
63° E 66° E 69° E

ktya rSh ah
Na di72° E Kot Tera yza i (A li Sh e r) 75° E
Wo za Jad ra nKho st Ma tu n (P rovi nc ia l Ce n te r)
Cannabis crop calendar

Typically, the planting season of cannabis is between March and May. The stem elongation stage of
cannabis is in July and August and the crop is in full bloom between September and October. In 2009, in
most areas, cannabis plants were fully matured and harvested from the field by the end of November. The
resin was extracted between late December 2009 and January 2010.
Results of the village survey and focus group interviews show that the cannabis crop cultivation cycle
differs between across the country due to the variation in climatic conditions:
• Cultivation in Central region starts between early April and June and harvesting is in November.
• Cultivation in Northern and Southern regions starts between mid-April and June.
• Farmers in the eastern part of Nangarhar province plant cannabis in June; however farmers in
Hisarak district of Nangarhar start early in March.
• Farmers in the Western region cultivate cannabis during the last week of May and early June.
However, in some districts of Hirat province, cultivation starts already in mid-March.
• In the North-eastern region, cannabis is planted in April and harvested between late October and
end of November. However, in some areas such as Baharak district of Badakhshan province, the
farmers plant cannabis as late as in June.
Cannabis and opium cultivation

Most of the cannabis cultivation was estimated to take place in the Southern region, where most of the
opium cultivation (84%) also took place in 2009. All four Southern provinces surveyed in the cannabis
survey (Hilmand, Kandahar, Uruzgan, Zabul) had sizable amounts of cannabis cultivation. Day Kundi was
not included in the cannabis risk area. There is a clear geographic association between opium and cannabis
cultivation at the provincial level, which was confirmed by interviewed farmers.
Out of the total number of interviewed farmers, 15% cultivated cannabis in 2009. About 53% had never
grown cannabis and 32% had stopped cannabis cultivation.
Over two thirds of interviewed cannabis farmers reported to have grown opium in the same year (67%).
However, this relationship is not exclusive: 11% of farmers who never grew cannabis grew opium in 2009.
The link between cannabis and opium cultivation seems to exist on the trading level as well. Information
gathered during surveyor debriefings in 2009 indicated that a large proportion of cannabis traders also
trade opium.
Cannabis yield
The production of cannabis resin in Afghanistan involves several steps. First, farmers dry the harvested
(cut) cannabis plants in the field and usually later dry them further inside the farm. The dried cannabis
plants are threshed and sieved to produce a powdery substance locally called “garda”. Garda consists of
cannabis resin proper but also other plant material. The objective is to extract as much cannabis resin as
possible. Through repeated sieving, farmers produce a graded quality which contains different proportions
of cannabis resin. Cannabis farmers interviewed during the survey did not report production or sale of
cannabis herb which is the upper part of the cannabis plant containing the floral cluster, often called
outside Afghanistan as marihuana. However, this does not preclude the existence of small-scale production
of cannabis herb.
20
Table 2: Cannabis and opium cultivation by province, 2009

Opium cultivation Cannabis cultivation
PROVINCE
2009 2009
Kabul 132 No cultivation reported*
Khost Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Logar Poppy free yes
Paktya Poppy free yes
Panjshir Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Parwan Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Wardak Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Ghazni Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Paktika Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Central Region 132 yes
Kapisa Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Kunar 164 No cultivation reported*
Laghman 135 No cultivation reported*
Nangarhar 294 yes
Nuristan Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Eastern Region 593 yes
Badakhshan 557 yes
Takhar Poppy free yes
Kunduz Poppy free no
North-eastern Region 557 yes
Baghlan Poppy free yes
Balkh Poppy free yes
Bamyan Poppy free no
Faryab Poppy free Insignificant
Jawzjan Poppy free yes
Samangan Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Sari Pul Poppy free no
Northern Region Poppy free yes
Hilmand 69,833 yes
Kandahar 19,811 yes
Uruzgan 9,224 yes
Zabul 1,144 yes
Day Kundi 3,002 No cultivation reported*
Southern Region 103,014 yes
Badghis 5411 yes
Farah 12,405 yes
Ghor Poppy free No cultivation reported*
Hirat 556 yes
Nimroz 428 yes
Western Region 18,800 yes
Total (rounded) 123,000 10,000-24,000
* These provinces were outside the cannabis risk area defined for the 2009 cannabis survey. The 14 provinces
outside the cannabis risk area were considered to be without cannabis cultivation as defined for this survey as
field information from survey activities in 2008 and 2009 did not indicated the existence of significant cannabis
cultivation.
21
Based on the quantity and quality of resin, garda is categorized as first garda, second garda and third garda.
Fourth gara was only reported in a few instance in the south. The first garda is considered to be the best
quality since it contains the highest proportion of resin. It is also more expensive than the second and third
garda qualities. Laboratory test to determine the actual resin or THC content of different garda qualities
were not part of this survey. Several garda extraction processes were observed and documented during the
survey. Based on this observation, it seems very likely that lower garda qualities contain significant
proportions of plant matter other than resin. It is not yet known how exactly farmers and traders determine
the garda grade outside the counting of the number of sieving processes performed to extract the resin. The
first, gentle shaking of the plant and sieving of plant material usually produces first garda, although the
first garda may also contain products from further sieving.
Many cannabis farmers sell garda (resin) to traders but some also further process it into hashish, which is
locally called “charas”. Hashish is the final product used for trafficking and consumption.
Picture 3: Mature female cannabis plant with resin glands
Mature female Cannabis plant with buds

cultivated in North Afghanistan
Information from focus group interviews indicated that regional differences exist in processing cannabis
into garda. For the purpose of estimating yield and production, provinces were grouped into two regions,
North-Northeast-West (N-NE-W) and South-East-Central (S-E). In the North, Northeast and West of the
country, the processing methods resulted with a higher quality but less quantity of first garda, whereas in
the South and East, a larger production of first garda was obtain, but with a lower quality (less resin and
more plant material).
The garda from the Northern region (Balkhi garda) contains more resin without the mixture of cannabis
leaves, in contrast to the Central and Eastern regions, where during processing of the first garda, the
farmers mix the cannabis leaves. In the Southern, Eastern and Central regions, the first and second yield
collected are combined and considered as first garda. The third and fourth sieving were combined and
considered as second garda and similarly for the fifth and sixth yield, which were considered as third
garda. Hence the quantity of garda yield is higher in these regions.
Table 3: Average cannabis garda yield by region (kg/ha), 2009
1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda 4th garda Total yield
Region
(kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha)
N-NE-W (n=15) 51.3 53.9 31.4 na 136.7
S-E (n=20) 71.8 44.9 27.7 2.3 146.7
Weighted average* 68.3 46.5 28.3 1.9 145.0
* Weighted by cultivation area. N refers to number of fields.
Cannabis yield studies conducted by the Government of Morocco in 2004 and 2005 in cooperation with
UNODC found much lower yields per hectare.12 The methodology to determine cannabis yield in Morocco
12
Royaume du Maroc/UNODC (2005): Maroc. Enquête sur le cannabis 2005. Janvier 2007.
Stambouli H., A. El Bouri, M. A. Bellimam, T. Bouayoun and N. El Karni (2005):Cultivation of Cannabis
sativa L. in northern Morocco. Bulletin on Narcotics, LVII, No. 1 and 2, 2005, p. 79-117.
22
consisted in harvesting cannabis plants and further processing them under controlled conditions in the
traditional way used in the country, which also involved sieving. The yield was established as the
extraction rate of cannabis powder from the harvested plant material, which was 2.82% in 2004 and 2.0%
in 2005. One hectare of irrigated cannabis field in Morocco produced about 35.8 kg of cannabis resin in
2004 and 36.4 kg in 2005. According to the study, this includes cannabis powder of three different
qualities, each representing about one third of the total production.
The comparability of the cannabis yield results from Morocco and Afghanistan is affected by
methodological differences (field observations in Afghanistan vs. controlled off-farm measurement in
Morocco) However, different processing and cultivation techniques, plant varieties and climatic conditions
can explain part of the different yield results obtained in Afghanistan and Morocco which suggests that the
two countries actually produce different cannabis products. The second and third garda produced in
Afghanistan for example may be a product with very different properties of the cannabis powder produced
in Morocco. Further investigations are needed to better identify what are the factors that can explain the
large differences between the two countries.
Potential cannabis production

Total cannabis garda production, including all garda qualities, was estimated in 2009 between 1,500 and
3,500 mt. The estimation range reflects the range reported for the cannabis cultivation area. Most of the
produced garda was of first quality. There are no standards across regions for garda qualities and garda of
one quality type may not be homogenous. The survey did not investigate THC content or other chemical
properties of the garda produced in Afghanistan and therefore its potency level is unknown.
Table 4: Potential cannabis resin garda production, 2009
1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda 4th garda Rounded
Region
(mt) (mt) (mt) (mt) total (mt)
Lower limit 693 471 287 19 1,500
Upper limit 1,648 1,120 683 45 3,500
As % of total garda 47% 32% 20% 1% 100%
Garda processing
At least two farmers are involved when producing the garda. At the beginning, they hit the dried cannabis
plants on a barrel (drum) to separate the buds from the main branches. Then, they collect the cannabis
powder (product) onto a heap inside a room. After separating the dried buds and leaves, they use the
remaining plant branches as cooking fuel. They also separate the seeds, after which they sieve (filter) the
product through a wooden frame (cot) kept in an inclined position. Two persons sieve the garda: one
collects the product by the shovel and spreads it over the cloth on the cot, assisted by the second person
who helps to spread the dust evenly, using the hands. After sieving, they put the product in a bag made of
cloth. The two persons hold the bag at the ends and shake the bag for about 5 minutes. Most of the dust is
filtered out during this process. The sieving takes place three times. The remaining powder is split and put
into smaller bags. A small quantity of powder is put in a cloth pouch and beaten by hand to remove the
remaining dust. Thus, the final garda contains mostly resin called first garda. The first garda in the
Northern region processed in this traditional way is considered to be the best quality and to contain a high
proportion of cannabis resin. It is also known as Jooshi or Balkhi garda. It was reported that 25 kg of
“normal” first garda produces only about 14 kg of Jooshi garda.
Most farmers usually sell the garda (resin) in its powdery form. The garda (resin) powder is not yet ready
for consumption, and another transformation is needed to convert garda powder into hashish. This
transformation is usually done by traders.
23
Picture 4: Stages of cannabis garda production
1.Cannabis dried plant ready for processing 2. Farmer crushing cannabis plants before
sieving
3. Cannabis plant crushed ready for sieving 4. Farmer removing cannabis sticks
5. Cannabis garda sieving through muslin cloth 6. Cannabis garda powder collected after sieving
Hashish production
The information collected during the survey, suggests that the amount of hashish produced from 1 kg of
cannabis garda vary across regions probably due to the different hashish production methods utilized. .
Traditional methods of hashish production from high quality garda powder typically generate a 1:1 ratio,
with no weight loss in the transformation process from garda to hashish. Weight loss, which was reported
occasionally, does probably occur due to a final “dusting” of the garda to get rid of unwanted plant
material and other matter, and is not a result of the conversion of garda in to hashish as such. Weight gain
could also occur, when water is added to facilitate the consolidation of cannabis garda powder into a paste
or mass that can be heated. Further research is needed to better understand if and to what extent such
weight gain occurs, how widespread it is, and if the added water evaporates (partly) later in the process.
With the current knowledge of the different hashish production methods used in Afghanistan, some of
which are explained in more detail below, it is reasonable to assume a 1:1 conversion rate of cannabis
garda into hashish.
24
Traditional hashish (charas) production

To make hashish from Jooshi garda, a farmer puts a handful of powder on his palm and lights a match.
Another farmer slowly sprinkles some powder on the top of the flame. During this process, the powder
gets heated The process is repeated a couple of times, until the product becomes soft, sticky and solid. The
resin is pressed and rolled by hand until the product becomes soft. Then, the solid mass turns into a
greenish brown product. This product is called Jooshi hashish (charas). This traditional process is time
consuming, but because of its quality, demand for this product is reportedly high, and it can be sold at high
price. Jooshi hashish is also known as Balkhi hashish or Sherak-i-Mazar (milk of Mazar).
Picture 5: Hashish production by machine
1.Cannabis powder (Garda) 2. Electric motor to run machine for

hashish preparation
3. Cannabis powder input to machine for 4. Out put of hashish from the machine
hashish processing
5. Reprocessing hashish in the machine 6.Hashish spread in the block-frame
7. Hashish rolled in the block-frame for 8. Hashish blocks ready for storing and
sizing trading
Hashish production by machine

The mechanized preparation of larger quantities of hashish seems to be a more recent development. This
machinery observed during the survey comes from Pakistan and can, reportedly, process the product
(garda) from one jerib land (0.2 ha) in 4-5 hours. It consists of a main part (funnel) where the garda is fed
into from the top. A rotating/kneading spiral shaft is connected to an electric motor. The garda powder is
25
continuously fed from the top and churned inside. The kneading and churning action heats the garda and
converts it into a thick, dark brown paste. This paste is reprocessed by feeding it for a second time into the
machine to achieve a homogenous hashish paste. The hashish paste is then put into a wooden mould and
spread uniformly using a roller, while covering it with a plastic sheet. According to anecdotal information,
this kind of machinery is currently only used by traders, not by farmers.
Manual hashish production in the Southern region

A small amount of garda powder is pressed with the palms of the hand. Good quality garda (first garda),
which is rich in resin and has “oily” components, gets sticky and consolidates when pressure is applied by
rubbing it between the hands. No other ingredients are needed in this case. However, some water is added
to garda powder of lower quality with a lower proportion of resin and oily components, to increase
cohesion and facilitate its consolidation. Then, the garda mass is heated over a low flame, sometimes
referred to as ‘cooking”, which converts it into hashish. There can be several rounds of rubbing, heating,
and rubbing again until a piece of garda mass is “cooked”. The addition of water in the process of hashish-
making from low quality garda adds weight but some of the water may evaporate later on through the
repeated heating and rubbing. This type of hashish preparation is done on a small scale and mostly used by
local traders and sporadically by local drug users.
Picture 6: Stages of manual hashish preparation from garda powder
1. Garda powder taken in hand for 2. Garda pressed with palms

pressing
3. Pressed garda being removed from 4. Sticky garda mass heated over low
the palm flame heater to become hashish
Reasons for cultivating cannabis

Cannabis farmers were asked for the most important reasons for doing so. The most frequent reason for
cannabis cultivation was the high sales price of cannabis compared to licit crops (39%) and low cultivation
costs (21%). Furthermore, cannabis was cultivated because of high demand (10%) and resistance against
diseases (7%). Few farmers reported that cultivation was for personal consumption (5%) and alleviating
poverty (4%). Other reasons included that cannabis was easy to grow (3%) or common to grow (3%). A
very small percentage of farmers mentioned that they are growing cannabis because of lack of government
support for alternative development opportunities, as well as lack of control by the government.
26
Figure 6: Reasons for cultivating cannabis in 2009 (n = 724 farmers)
High sale price of cannabis compared to licit crops 39%
Low cost of inputs(seeds,fertilizer,labour) 21%
High demand for cannabis 10%
Resistant against disease 7%
Others 6%
For personal consumption 5%
Poverty alleviation 4%
Easy/Experienced to grow 3%
Common to grow 3%
No support from Government 1%
No control from Government 1%
0% 20% 40%
Reason for stopping cannabis cultivation
Similar to opium poppy, cannabis is an illicit crop in Afghanistan and the possession of cannabis products
is a legal offence. A high number of farmers reported that they stopped cannabis cultivation because of the
ban by the government. The other dominant reasons were because cultivation is against Islam, decision of
the elders and Shura, as well as poor yield. Other reasons included lack of experience, negative impact on
human beings, fear of imprisonment, enough income from other crops and fear of eradication. Quite a few
also mentioned that cannabis resin processing is too time consuming or that they lack water and land to
cultivate cannabis.
Approximately 25% of the farmers who stopped cannabis cultivation, compensated the loss of cash income
by taking a loan, other employment, labor work, help from abroad, or selling household goods.
Figure 7: Reasons for stopping cannabis cultivation (n = 1,553 farmers)
Banned by government 33%

Against Islam 20%
Decision of elders and Shura 9%
Poor yield 8%
Other 5%
Low sale price of cannabis (chars) 5%
Lack of experience 5%
Negative impact on human beings 4%
Fear of imprisonment 3%
Enough income from other crops 3%
Fear of eradication 2%
No response/No data 2%
Lack of water/land 1%
Resin processing is too long 1%
0% 18% 36%
27
Conditions for resuming cannabis cultivation in future

The farmers who stopped cannabis cultivation were asked under what condition they would restart
growing it. A number of farmers responded that they would grow cannabis because its high sale price
(35%), lack of eradication (19%), good income (18%), no control from the government (7%) and to
alleviate poverty (6%).
Figure 8: Conditions for resuming cannabis cultivation in future, reported by farmers who stopped
cultivation (n=1,553 farmers)
High s ale price 35%
No eradication 19%
Good incom e 18%
Other 11%
No control from governem ent 7%
Poverty alleviation 6%
If m ore water available 2%
If m ore land available 2%
Les s efforts to cultivate cannabis 1%
0% 18% 36%
Conditions which would lead farmers who had never grown cannabis to start cultivating it
Farmers who had never grown cannabis, were asked under what conditions they would start cultivating it.
The conditions included: high sale cannabis price (40%), poverty alleviation (20%) and good income from
cannabis (17%). Few farmers reported that they would start if they would receive advance money (3%),
there was no cannabis eradication (2%), there was more water available (1%) or if there was no control
from the government (1%).
Figure 9: Reason for potentially cultivating cannabis in future as reported by farmers who have never
grown cannabis (n = 2,625 farmers)
High s ale price 40%
Poverty allev iation 20%
Good income 17%
Other 16%
To receive advanc e money 3%
No eradication 2%
if enough w ater avaialble 1%
No control f rom governement 1%
0% 22% 44%
28
Agricultural assistance received

Village headmen were interviewed in the survey to understand farmers’ access to agricultural assistance
services. More than half of villages surveyed (51%) reported having received agriculture assistance. The
assistance was provided in the form of seeds, fertilizer and provision of irrigation. The types of assistance
varied and included improved seeds (51%), fertilizers (46%), irrigation system improvement (for example
karez) and stream cleaning (1%). Support in the form of agricultural tools, insecticides and saplings was
minimal (less than 1% each).
Figure 10: Type of agricultural assistance received reported by headmen (n =1,634 villages)
Improved s eeds 51.3%
Fertilizers 46.4%
Irrigation s ystem 1.0%
Agric ultural tools (like

0.6%
trac tor etc)
Insectic ides /s pray 0.4%
Saplings 0.3%
0% 30% 60%
There was a statistical association between cannabis cultivation and not having received agricultural
assistance but the size of the effect was not very big. Villages that had not received agricultural assistance
were slightly more likely to have cannabis cultivation. This association may also be due to the fact that
most cannabis growing villages were located in the Southern region, where the security situation is volatile
and the delivery of agricultural assistance difficult.
Table 5: Agricultural assistance and cannabis cultivation, 2009 (n=1,634)
No cannabis Cannabis
No. of villages Total
cultivation cultivating village
No agricultural assistance
417 380 797
received
Agricultural assistance 498 339 837
Total 915 719 1,634
Access to development facilities in the surveyed villages

All village headmen were interviewed on the status and availability of basic development facilities in their
villages. Basic facilities on which information was collected covered credit, electricity, irrigation, markets
for agricultural products, medical facilities, off-farm employment opportunities, telephones, drinking
water, road and transport, schools, training on vocational skills and access to TV/radios.
29
Figure 11: Access to services in the cannabis risk area, 2009 (n = 1,628 villages)
Training on vocational skills
Off-farm employment opportunities
Credit
Electricity
Market for agricultural products
Medical center
School
Phones
TV/radio
Irrigation water
Drinkable water
Road and transportation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Village without access Village with access
According to the information provided by headmen, over three quarters of the villages surveyed had no
access to vocational training, off-farm employment, credit facilities and electricity. Over half of the
villages had no access to market for their agricultural products and no local medical facility.
Figure 12: Access to schools and media in the cannabis risk area, by cannabis growing status, 2009
Access to schools Access to TV or radio
n=1,628 n=1,628
100% 100%
90% 90%
80% 80%
70% 70%
% of villages
% of villages
60% 60%
50% 50%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
Without cannabis With cannabis Without cannabis With cannabis
Villages Villages
No school Access to school No TV/radio Access to TV/radio
Little difference was found between cannabis growing and non-growing villages with regard to access to
roads, off-farm employment, credit and electricity. More cannabis growing villages reported to have access
to market facilities than non-cannabis growing villages. This may be due to the fact that most cannabis
growing villages were located in the Southern region with mainly flat terrain were transport in general is
easier than in mountainous regions.
30
Significant differences were found in access to schools. The proportion of villages with no access to
schools was much higher among cannabis growing villages. On the other hand, the proportion of villages
were the population reportedly had access to TV and radio was much higher in cannabis growing villages.
It was not possible to verify the information provided by headmen. However, it can be concluded that basic
conditions for agricultural development were absent in large parts of the cannabis risk area. Lack of access
to educational facilities is worrying especially in cannabis growing villages, while there seems to be a
wider access to TV and radio.
Income sources of the farmers and cannabis cultivation

The income level of the cannabis cultivating farmers was compared with the income of farmers who
stopped cultivating cannabis in 2008 and of farmers who had never grown cannabis. The average reported
income of cannabis cultivating farmers was higher than the income of farmers who stopped cultivation (-
7%) and farmers who have never cultivated cannabis (-28%). Moreover, farmers who stopped cannabis
cultivation, had less income from wheat (30%) than farmers who never cultivated cannabis (35%). Wheat
was the major income source of the farmers who did not grow cannabis and those who had stopped
growing cannabis. Their other sources of income included daily wages, remittances, other licit crops and
livestock.
Figure 13: Sources of 2008 cash income of farmers cultivating cannabis in 2009
Wheat Cannabis
26% 28%
Renting Daily/Monthly w ages

0.5% 5%
Live stock
Receiving money f rom 9%
abroad
7% Poppy Other
10% Other crops 5%
10%
31
Figure 14: Sources of 2008 cash income of farmers who stopped cannabis cultivation in 2009 or before
Cannabis
Wheat 17%
30%
Daily/Monthly w ages
10%
Renting
0.8% Live stock
9%
Receiving money f rom
abroad Other
6% Poppy Other crops 5%
9% 12%
Figure 15: Sources of 2008 cash income of farmers who never cultivated cannabis as reported in 2009
Daily/Monthly w ages
12%
Wheat
35%
Live stock
15%
Other
Renting 9%
1.7%
Other crops
Receiving money f rom 17%
abroad
10%
Coping strategy for the reduced income of farmers who stopped cultivating cannabis
The farmers who stopped cannabis cultivation were asked if their income had decreased or increased or
whether there was no change. About 25% reported that their income had decreased and they had
difficulties to cope with the situation. Many had to reduce household expenses (40%), others reported that
they had to engage in wage labour (32%). Other strategies used by farmers were: alternative employment
9%), obtaining loans (7%), cultivation of licit crops (4%), remittances (4%) and selling of livestock (2%).
32
Figure 16: Coping strategies for the reduced income by stopping cannabis cultivation
Reduce household ex penses 40%
Labour w ork 32%
Other employ ment 9%
Obtained loan 7%
Income from licit crop 4%
Support from abroad 4%
Other 3%
Selling liv e-stock 2%
0% 22% 44%
Cannabis cultivating households

Based on the villages survey, the number of cannabis growing households in 2009 was estimated at 40,000
households. The 40,000 households estimated to be involved in cannabis cultivation was calculated on the
basis of the interviews carried out during the village survey. This number fits well with the range that can
be calculated for the number of households on the basis of the area under cannabis cultivation (10,000 ha
to 24,000 ha) and the estimated average area of area under cannabis cultivation per household (0.4 ha).
Based on this calculation the number of households involved in cannabis cultivation ranges between
25,000 and 60,000.
Income from cannabis

Based on prices at the time of resin extraction (January 2010) and the average resin yield of 2009, farmers
could achieve a gross cash income per hectare of US$ 3,890/ha (rounded US$ 3,900/ha) from cannabis
resin. This is slightly more than the gross income from opium was in 2009 (US$ 3,600/ha). The gross
income from cannabis resin does not take into account the potential value of cannabis by-products such as
cannabis seeds or stalks.13
13
In the yield observation survey, farmers reported on average of 665 kg cannabis seed per hectare on cannabis
mono-crop fields, ranging from a minimum of 175 kg/ha to 1,400 kg/ha. Considerably higher seed yields were
reported in the S-E region (average 943 kg/ha) than in the N-NE-W region (average 294 kg/ha). One farmer
reported obtaining a price of 20 Afghanis (approx. US$ 0.41) per kg for cannabis seeds. The average seed yield
of 665 kg/ha would add US$ 273 to the gross income per hectare.
33
Figure 17: Average annual per hectare income from cannabis and opium (US$), 2009
4,000
559
3,500
3,000
1,584
2,500
US$/ha
2,000
3,341
1,500
1,000 2,005
500
0
From cannabis From opium
Per hectare income 2009
Net income Expenditure
With an average of 0.4 ha per household, the average gross income from cannabis per household amounted
to US$ 1,553. This is slightly less than the gross income per household from opium in 2009 (US$ 1,786).
The expenditure per hectare of cannabis cultivation was estimated at US$ 559/ha or 14% of gross income.
This is much lower than costs of opium cultivation, which was estimated at US$ 1,584/ha or 44% of gross
income from opium per hectare. Cannabis farmers have lower costs especially for harvesting, which in the
case of opium is done by skilled lancers who often come from other provinces. For opium cultivation,
lancing cost constituted almost half of all expenditure whereas for cannabis cultivation, costs for fertilizer
were a more important expenditure item, and harvesting and cannabis extraction (sieving) accounted for
only 22% of total per-hectare expenditure. The focus group interviews and yield observation surveys
revealed that cannabis harvest, i.e. cutting the plants, and resin extraction are two separate activities which
can be spread over several weeks. Thus, farmers manage to conduct many of these necessary activities
with (“free”) family labour without having to hire outside labourers.
Expenditures for cannabis cultivation are closer to those needed for wheat cultivation which are estimated
at 20% of gross income. In combination with the relatively high per hectare gross income, this makes
cannabis a more profitable crop than opium poppy. Notwithstanding this, the survey showed that a much
smaller number of households was involved in cannabis cultivation and that the average area cultivated
with cannabis per household was smaller than the average area households use for opium poppy
cultivation. In addition, mixed cropping of cannabis is common in some regions, a pattern which is not
know from opium cultivation.
Why would households not grow more cannabis and exclusively as a mono-crop? One hypothesis is that
less land for cultivation is available in summer, the second agricultural season in the year, when cannabis
is grown. Other reasons may include less water available for irrigation. In a subsistence agriculture, food
crops and fodder are to a certain point indispensable, and compete with cash crops like cannabis for scarce
land.
34
Figure 18: Comparison of expenditure distribution per hectare of opium and cannabis cultivation, 2009
Expenditure distribution for cannabis cultivation Expenditure distribution for opium cultivation
Weeding
Weeding
9%
Seed Seed 10%
3% Fertilizer
Other 28% Plough1% Fertilizer
expenses 7% 29%
8%
Irrigation
6%
Labour 5
(Ploughing)
13%
Harvesting
Irrigation (Reaping,
17% sieving) Lancing
22% 47%
Cannabis trading
According to anecdotal information received during the survey, many illegal cannabis trading centres exist
in different parts of the country. In the Northern region, it is reported that there are cannabis trading centres
in Baghlan-i-Jadad, Talwa Barfak, Andarab, Puli-Hisar and Deh-Salah in Baghlan province; Chimtal,
Balkh, Chaharbolak and Gurziwan in Balkh province and Qaysar, Kohistant and Pashtonkot in Faryab
province. In the Eastern region, Hesarak and Sherzad in Nanagarhar province are famous for such illegal
trading centres. In the Central region the centres are located in Ahmad Abad, Sayd Karam in Paktya
province and Kharwar and Mohammad Agha districts in Logar province. In the North–eastern region,
Khash and Baharak districts in Badakhshan province and Taloqan in Takhar province are known for illegal
cannabis trading centres. In the Southern region, Dehnaw in Uruzgan province and Spin Boldak in
Kandahar province are the most famous centres inside Afghanistan. Spin Boldak is also well known as a
centre for preparing hashish from garda. In the Western region, Farah and Nimroz cities are known for the
cannabis trading. The survey revealed that traders have introduced the technique of converting garda to
hashish using machines. Most recently, this has been found in main cannabis trading centres in Kandahar,
Balkh and Uruzgan. These centres are at clandestine locations such as in the areas of Chimtal in Balkh,
Dehnaw in Uruzgan and Spin Boldak in Kandahar province.
Unlike opium, garda can reportedly be stored only for 3 to 10 months depending upon the moisture
content. If the garda is not properly stored, it can get spoiled and its quality reduced. Most of the farmers
reported that they prefered to sell the garda immediately after harvesting. However, few farmers, who can
afford to wait till the price of garda rises, store garda 3 to 10 months in leather or goat skin bags, called
“gharak”.
35
36
Map 4: Drug trading centres in Afghanistan, 2009
60°E 65°E 70°E 75°E
UZBEKISTAN
UZBEKISTAN
TAJIKISTAN
TAJIKISTAN
Fayz abad
TURKMENISTAN
TURKMENISTAN Badakhshan
Jawzjan Kunduz
Balkh
Takhar
Faryab Baghlan
Sari Pul Samangan
Panjshir Nuristan
35°N Bamyan Parwan Kapisa 35°N
Kunar
Badghis
Kabul
Jalalabad
Hirat Kabul Legend INDIA
INDIA
Wardak Nangarhar
Logar Opium trading centre
Hirat
Ghor
Paktya Cannabis trading centre
Day Kundi
Ghazni District boundary
Khost
Provincial boundary
Farah Uruzgan International boundary
Farah Paktika
Zabul
PAKISTAN
PAKISTAN
Kandahar
Hilmand
Kandahar
IRAN
IRAN Nimroz
0 50 100 200
Km
30°N Geographic projection, WGS 84 30°N
60°E 65°E 70°E 75°E

Cannabis prices
Farm-gate prices of cannabis garda

Differences in the farm-gate price of cannabis resin reflect different garda qualities and regional
distribution. Prices reported by farmers during the survey referred to first, second and third garda. Fourth
garda prices were not reported although some farmers reported fourth garda yield figures.
Prices reported from the S-E region (Southern, Eastern, Central regions) were lower for all garda qualities.
This is consistent with reports that the processing of garda in this regions results in higher garda yields per
hectare but lower quality garda. The price difference between first and second, and first and third garda
were also slightly larger in the S-E region.
Figure 19: Farm-gate prices of garda reported by headmen at the time of the survey (US$/kg), 2009
2nd garda 3rd garda
st nd rd
1 garda 2 garda 3 garda price as % price as %
Region
(US$/kg) (US$/kg) (US$/kg) of 1st garda of 1st garda
price price
N-NE-W 57.3 38.6 21.6 0.7 0.4
S-E 41.9 24.9 11.7 0.6 0.3
Average* 51.0 33.0 17.5 0.7 0.3
* Simple average of provincial averages.
The prices reported by headmen referred to the current prices at the time of the survey. Focus group
interviews revealed, however, that most farmers sell their cannabis garda soon after harvest, i.e. in January.
Therefore, the January prices reported through the monthly price monitoring system were used to calculate
farmers’ income and farm-gate value of cannabis production. The January prices were higher than the
prices reported during the survey, as some regions experienced a price increase in the course of 2009,
namely Nangarhar and Balkh, while others were at about the same level.
Table 6: Farm-gate prices of cannabis garda by region from the monthly price monitoring system
(US$/kg), January 2010
1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda
(US$/kg) (US$/kg) (US$/kg)
Average* 58 38 20
* Simple average of provincial averages.
st
Source: 1 garda prices: MCN/UNODC monthly price monitoring report, January 2010. 2nd and 3rd garda
prices: own calculations.
Regional differences in cannabis garda prices

Between January 2006, when regular price monitoring started, and January 2010, monthly farm-gate prices
of cannabis garda showed large changes both within and across regions. Compared to other regions, prices
in the south were relatively stable since 2006. Since the beginning of 2008, the north shows higher prices
than in the South and East. However, in the second half of 2009, prices in Balkh and Nangarhar sharply
increased whereas other provinces showed little changes. As there is no standard garda quality, it is not
possible to determine to what extend cannabis garda prices reflect changes in the garda quality of changes
in the market.
37
Figure 20: Monthly farm-gate prices of cannabis garda (best quality) by region, Jan. 2006 – Jan. 2010
100
90
80
70
60
US$/kg
50
40
30
20
10
0
01/2006 01/2007 01/2008 01/2009 01/2010
Badakhshan Balkh Hirat
Nangarhar Kandahar Takhar
Source: MCN/UNODC monthly price monitoring system.
As it can be noted in the graph above, in January 2006, there was a narrow difference between provinces
(around US$ 20/kg). This difference was much higher (around US$ 64/kg) in October 2007, it reduced
again December 2009 (reaching about US$ 46/kg). During the period January 2006 to January 2010, the
highest price (around US$ 100/kg) was found in Badakhshan in July 2007, whereas the lowest price
(around US$ 19/kg) was found in Kandahar in July 2008. The national average price for cannabis was
relatively low (around US$ 39/kg) in February-March, 2006 and it jumped to its highest (around US$
78/kg) in August-September 2007. At the end of 2009 it return to the 2006 levels reaching US$ 52/kg.
The general annual trend shows that prices had moved up during 2007-2008 (US$ 60/kg and US$ 56/kg
respectively) in comparison to 2006 (US$ 49), and decreased in 2009 (US$ 50/kg). The same trend was
reflected by wholesale prices for hashish on the Peshawar market in Pakistan.
Farm-gate prices of hashish
Farm-gate prices for hashish were reported by headmen in practically all cannabis cultivating villages. This
indicates that some farmers process cannabis garda into hashish, locally also called charas. However,
interviews with farmers during the yield observation survey revealed that most farmers do not produce
hashish but sell cannabis garda. Out of 46 farmers interviewed during the yield observation survey, only 9
produced hashish.14 The conversion from garda to hashish requires a considerable labour input or the
availability of machines, which require access to electricity and are not easily available in the rural area.
These machines are reportedly used by traders rather than by farmers. This may be one of the reasons why
most farmers do not process cannabis garda into hashish, despite the considerable increase in value.
14
The exact proportion of farmers engaged in converting cannabis garda into hashish or the quantity of garda
being processed by farmers could not be quantified as this was not part of the main survey questionnaire.
38
Figure 21: Average annual prices of cannabis products in Pakistan and Afghanistan, 2006-2009
300
250
200
US$/kg 150
100
50
0
2006 2007 2008 2009
Peshawer, Pakistan 194 267 270 253
(hashish, best quality,
wholesale)
Afghanistan (cannabis 1st 49 60 56 50
garda, farm-gate)
Table 7: Farm-gate hashish prices as reported by headmen at the time of the survey (US$/kg), 2009
3rd garda
2nd garda
1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda hashish price
hashish price as
hashish hashish hashish as % of 1st
% of 1st garda
(US$/kg) (US$/kg) (US$/kg) garda hashish
hashish price
price
N-NE-W 82 56 35 0.7 0.4
S-E 63 48 33 0.8 0.5
Average* 74 53 34 0.7 0.5
* Simple average of provincial average prices.
The hashish grading and prices reported seem to reflect the cannabis garda qualities (1st, 2nd and 3rd garda).
Hashish prices were 1.5 to almost three times more the price of cannabis garda (powder), depending on the
region and garda quality. While the value added for 1st garda hashish was similar in the N-NE-W and S-E
region, 3rd garda hashish prices were almost 3 times the prices of 3rd garda powder.
Table 8: Farm-gate hashish price as proportion of cannabis garda powder price (US$/kg), 2009
N-NE-W 1.4 1.5 1.6
S-E 1.5 1.9 2.9
Average 1.5 1.6 1.9
Note: Calculated from headmen’s responses at the time of the survey.
It is not clear if 3 garda hashish is exclusively made from 3rd garda powder as information from focus
rd
group interviews indicate that mixing of garda from different sieving processes is common, especially in
the South. This may also be true for hashish. A further disaggregation of hashish prices reveals that in the
Eastern region, prices for hashish of different qualities differ relatively little, whereas in all other regions,
larger price differences were observed. As for the different garda qualities, it should be noted that there is
no standard hashish quality, and the composition and drug content of the product sold as hashish was not
investigated in this survey. The fact that prices for 2nd garda hashish in the Eastern and Western regions
39
were higher than the 1st garda hashish price in the Southern region can be a result of differences in demand
and/or different garda quality but it could also be a consequence of (actual or perceived) differences in
product quality.
The average wholesale price of best quality hashish in Peshawar (US$ 253/kg) in 2009 was over three
times the farm-gate price of hashish reported by headmen. This price difference is higher than for opium,
which was traded at US$ 145/kg in Peshawar while the farm-gate prices of dry opium at harvest time was
US$ 63/kg at harvest time.
Figure 22: Farm-gate prices of hashish by region as reported by headmen (US$/kg), 2009
100
90
80
70
60
US$/kg
50
40
30
20
10
0
Eastern N-NE Southern Western
1st garda hashish 2nd garda hashish 3rd garda hashish
N-NE: The Northern and North-eastern regions were joined due a low number of observations in the North-
eastern region.
Cannabis seizures
Drug seizures to not necessarily take place close to the place and time of production. They do not
necessarily reflect cultivation patterns or production levels but can also indicate possible trafficking routes,
markets and consumption centres.
Many cannabis cultivating provinces appear on the list of provincial hashish seizure amounts reported by
CNPA between 2007 and 2009. In 2007, the highest quantity of hashish was seized in Paktya (11,693 kg),
followed by Kandahar (9,266 kg) and Khost (8,329 kg). In 2008, Kandahar topped the list with an
exceptionally high seizure of 244,638 kg, most of which was seized in one single operation, followed by
Paktya (13,975 kg) and Balkh (3,803 kg). In 2009, none of the northern and north-eastern provinces had
large seizure amounts and the bulk of seizures was reported for the Central, Eastern and Southern region.
In the regions of Central Asia, Middle East and South Asia, most cannabis resin seizures are reported from
Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. Reports from Iran and Pakistan indicate that most of the cannabis resin
(hashish) seized there originates from Afghanistan. Data from Pakistan shows a generally upward trend of
cannabis resin seizures since 2005 whereas seizures in Iran have declined recently. The large cannabis
resin seizure in Kandahar in 2008 was exceptional within Afghanistan but also in comparison to its
neighbours. A similarly large seizure did not occur in Afghanistan in 2009.
40
Table 9: Hashish seizures in Afghanistan by province (kg), 2007 - 200915

Province 2007 2008 2009
Badakhshan 74 362 153
Badghis 30 0 1
Baghlan 38 1,124 27
Balkh 4,042 3,803 37
Bamyan 0 0 1
Daykundi 0 0 0
Farah 0 0 0.1
Faryab 71 0 0.1
Ghazni 0 0 3
Ghor 19 0 0
Hilmand 1,112 1,466 558
Hirat 1,880 2,786 40
Jawzjan 24 45 51
Kabul 5,067 531 11,319
Kandahar 9,266 244,638 6,765
Kapisa 1 0 1
Khost 8,329 0 13
Kunar 0 173 104
Kunduz 319 236 23
Laghman 0 0 8
Logar 5,455 0 14
Nangarhar 5,663 1,200 3,184
Nimroz 6,182 285 44
Nuristan 0 0 0
Paktika 0 0 0
Paktya 11,693 13,975 594
Panjshir 0 0 6
Parwan 0 25 17
Samangan 0 0 0
Sari Pul 0 0 0
Takhar 23 89 4
Uruzgan 0 0 5
Wardak 0 0 0
Zabul 399 302 0.3
D-333 * 72
Total 59,686 271,040 23,041
* Operations throughout the country
Source: Counter Narcotics Police of Afghanistan (CNPA)
15
Note: Figures presented here can differ from aggregate seizure amounts at the national level published in the
World Drug Report 2010, which may include seizures from several agencies.
41
Figure 23: Seizures of cannabis resin (hashish) in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan (kg), 2002 - 2009
300,000
250,000
200,000
kg
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Afghanistan 50,314 81,176 41,146 42,389 36,972 83,844 271,021 23,041
Iran, Islamic Republic of 64,166 76,991 86,500 68,836 59,189 89,718 75,092 69,222
Pakistan 85,126 99,123 135,639 93,539 115,444 109,531 134,622
Source: Annual Reports Questionnaires 2002-2008. 2009 figures: Government reports. Pakistan seizure figures
for 2009 were not yet available at the time of printing of this report.
Payment of tax on cannabis (usher)

Usher is an informal tax of about 10% of the value on agricultural products paid by farmers to groups
which control the territory in rural Afghanistan. Over two thirds of cannabis farmers (70%) reported the
payment of usher on their 2008 cannabis production, whereas 30% did not pay usher. There were strong
regional differences: An overwhelming majority of cannabis farmers in the Southern region paid usher,
while few farmers in the Northern, North-eastern and Western regions did so. This regional pattern is
similar to the usher payment pattern reported in the Annual Opium Survey 2009, when mostly farmers in
the Southern region reported having paid usher on opium, compared to only a small proportion of farmers
in other regions. In the Eastern and Central region, usher payment on cannabis was reported from Logar
and Paktya provinces but not from Nangarhar.
Figure 24: Payment of usher in 2008 by region, reported by cannabis farmers in 2009 (n=724)
100%
90%
80%
% of cannabis farmers
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Eastern- North, North- Southern Western Average
Central eastern
Usher paid No usher paid
42
Almost an equal proportion of farmers reported paying usher only in cash or only in kind. Only a small
proportion paid usher partly in cash and partly in kind.
Figure 25: Type of usher payment made by cannabis farmers in 2008, (n=508)
Usher paid
in cash and
in kind
11%
Usher paid
only in kind
42%
Usher paid
only in cash
47%
The responses on to whom usher was paid were not easy to interpret. Many cannabis farmers (35%)
reported having paid to several recipients, e.g to the Mullah and the poor. These two recipients were often
mentioned together, sometimes in combination with the Taliban. It is not easy to differentiate to whom the
usher was paid, by whom it was collected and for which purpose. The responses given should therefore be
interpreted with caution.
Figure 26: Recipients of usher payment in 2008, reported by cannabis farmers in 2009 (n=508)
Taliban
Relatives, friends
Usher paid to
Poor people
Mullah
Other
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Number of responses (multiple responses possible)
Farm-gate value of cannabis production

The farm-gate value of cannabis garda production in 2009 was estimated to range between US$ 39 million
and US$ 94 million. This is equivalent to 9% to 21% of the farm-gate value of opium production in 2009.
The farm-gate value of cannabis production correspond to 0.4% to 0.9% of the 2009 GDP of Afghanistan.
43
3 METHODOLOGY
The survey had two main components:
• A questionnaire survey with interviews of village headmen and three farmers per village in a
sample of villages, randomly selected under an area frame sampling approach.
• A remote sensing survey using a sample of satellite images.
In addition, several other survey instruments were used to investigate specific aspects of cannabis
cultivation and production:
• Focus group discussion: cannabis yield, harvesting, processing
• Yield observation: cannabis yield per field, timing of harvest, processing of plants, work inputs for
processing, involvement of other household members
The information from the different survey instruments was complemented by information from the
monthly price monitoring system, which also covers cannabis resin, and from the Annual Opium Surveys
where appropriate.
The sampling was followed on the guidelines of an area frame sampling design. An area frame sampling
design is a widely used methodology in agricultural statistics. 464 grids were selected by using probability
proportional to size (PPS, where size is defined by the amount of agricultural land). Four villages (when
there were only three villages in the segment, three villages were selected) within each grid were randomly
selected using GIS tools (Hawth tools build-in in ARC view software). This resulted in a total sample size
of 1,758 villages. This method has contributed sampling approach by weight on cannabis cultivated
districts of Afghanistan based on past years with reference to the information collected during opium
poppy survey conducted by UNODC survey section.
Given the lack of accurate and reliable statistics on the extent and distribution of area under cannabis
cultivation in Afghanistan it has been proposed to carry out a survey which combines remote sensing
techniques and village survey data. The aim of this survey is to provide the framework and procedures for
obtaining reliable statistics on the cannabis situation in the entire territory of Afghanistan.
Survey components
Village survey
The sampling follows the guidelines of an area frame sampling design. An area frame sampling design is a
widely used methodology in agricultural statistics. For the aims of this survey the following steps were
carried out.
Construction of the sampling frame: The purpose of stratification in any survey is to reduce the variance of
the variables under study in each stratum. The village frame is a list of villages compiled by The Central
Statistical Office in Afghanistan and AIMS. It contains the village name, district name, province name,
location, number of households, and average household size. It has 43,556 villages in total. This frame was
overlaid with the most recent map of agricultural land in Afghanistan and divided in a series of 10 km by
10 km grids. The resulting frame is a collection of 4,231 grids (each of them with an area of 100 squared
km); each grid in the frame contains one or more villages and a determined amount of agricultural land.
By consultations with survey coordinators in Afghanistan, it was concluded that several districts in some
provinces in Afghanistan have little or almost null cannabis cultivation. In order to optimize resources, it
was decided to exclude all this districts from the sampling frame. Therefore, only 105 districts in 20
provinces in Afghanistan were targeted as potential areas with cannabis cultivation.
Considering only the potential areas translates into a sampling frame of 13,713 villages enclosed within
1,569 grids holding approximately 30 million squared kilometres of irrigated land.
Auxiliary information collected during the cannabis rapid assessment in December 2008 also allowed
survey coordinators to provide in some extent the degree of cultivation (low, medium, high) for each of the
potential districts in Afghanistan. Due to non significant differences between low, medium and high
cultivation levels, it was decided not to stratify the sampling frame under this scheme.
45
Sample size. More than one item or characteristic is usually measured in surveys and often times the
number is large. If a desired degree of precision is prescribed for each item, the sample size calculations
lead to series of conflicting values for n (see Cochran, Wiley 1977 for formulae). To determine the sample
size for the cannabis survey in Afghanistan, two constraints were considered. Firstly, it was assumed that
not much about the amount of cannabis cultivation was known, although some survey coordinators could
provide in some extent orders of magnitude but the variability was too high to be able to be included as
means of stratification. Secondly, there is a budget constraint due to field and operations costs, limiting the
village survey to carry out up to 1,700 interviews.
In order to collect as much variability as possible in terms of area under cannabis cultivation among
villages and taken into account the constraints described above it was determined to select a sample of
clusters as primary sampling units (PSU). Each cluster corresponds to a grid which geographically groups
a set of villages.
With an unknown value of the probability of finding cannabis cultivation in a village, a desired level of
precision of +/- 5% and willingness of taking 1 in 20 chance of getting an unlucky sample, Cochran (1977)
states that the minimum sample size may be calculated as below under a simple random sampling
approach.
Equation 4.1
t 2 PQ
n= d2
1 t 2 PQ
1 + ( 2 − 1)
N d
Or for practical use, an advance estimate p of P is substituted in this formula. If N is large enough, a first
approximation is
Equation 4.2
t 2 pq
n0 = 2
d
With a d=0.05 (precision), p=0.50 (unknown presence of cannabis), alpha=0.05 (error willing to take),
t=1.96 (from normal distribution tables)
Thus equation 4.2 is
(1.96) * (0.5) * (0.5)

n0 = = 400
(0.0025)
Collecting data in the ground in Afghanistan involves costs which significantly restricts the size of the
sample. Overhead cost of managing the survey and the cost per village interview limited the sample as
expressed in the following formula.
Equation 4.3 and 4.4

n0*m < Sample size < 1,500
and
C (n) = co + c1*n
46
Where m is the number of villages to be interviewed in each grid, C is the cost function, Co is the overhead
cost and C1 is the cost of interviewing each village headman.
With a view of absorb as much variability as possible within the grids, it has been opt to select up to 4
villages in each grid as secondary sampling units. Therefore, in order to maximize 4.4 subject to 4.3, the
solution for n yields 400 grids.
It is a common practice in surveys to increase the sample size by an amount equal to the anticipated non-
response rate. Increasing the sample ensures that the actual number of interviews completed in the survey
will closely approximate the target sample size. Therefore, the resulting sample size is 464 grids.
Sample selection. Due to the fact that the agricultural land in each segment varies considerably, it was opt
to use probability proportionate to size (PPS) sampling. The use of PPS sampling permits the sampler to
have better control over the ultimate sample size in cluster surveys. Within each cluster, it was opt to use a
fixed cluster size. This sampling plan, probability proportionate to size with a fixed cluster size has the
following advantages:
• Maximum control of total sample size and costs
• Control of interviewer work loads
464 grids were selected by using probability proportional to size (PPS, where size is defined by the amount
of agricultural land). Four villages (when there were only three villages in the segment, three villages were
selected) within each grid were randomly selected using GIS tools (Hawth tools build-in in ARC view
software). This resulted in a total sample size of 1,758 villages.
Data collection and data entry
The village survey was carried out by experienced surveyors of UNODC/MCN Afghanistan under the
close supervision of UNODC/MCN Survey Coordinators, who were also involved in the opium poppy
survey for many years. The methodology of the cannabis survey 2009 covered various tools, such as
village survey through questionnaire to different types of farmers like “cannabis growing”, “stopped
cannabis growing” and “cannabis never grown”. The village survey also included interviews of 1634
village headmen to understand the extent of cannabis crop cultivation and socio-economic factors behind
it. In addition to the village survey, other important methods such as focus group discussions (FGD) with
the targeted farmers, ground truth collection for the imagery interpretation, area estimation of cannabis
field as well as the growth calendar of the crop and yield survey. In fact the survey methodology was based
on a sampling approach and was combined with the use of satellite imagery and extensive field visits. For
the images, high resolution satellite images were acquired.
For this task, 148 surveyors visited 1,634 responded villages out of a total of 1,758 sampled villages spread
over 26 Provinces. The Villages were stratified according to the area frame sampling method. An area
frame sampling design is a widely used methodology in agricultural statistics. A total of 464 grids were
selected by using probability proportional to size (PPS, where size is defined by the amount of agricultural
land). Four villages (when there were only three villages in the segment, three villages were selected)
within each grid were randomly selected using GIS tools (Hawth tools build-in in ARC view software).
This resulted in a total sample size of 1,634 villages. This method has contributed to determine the
sampling approach by weight on cannabis cultivated districts of Afghanistan based on past years estimates
with reference to the information collected during opium poppy survey conducted by UNODC survey
section. Altogether, 148 surveyors interviewed 4,902 farmers in the village survey. The Survey
Coordinators conducted targeted focus group discussions and also ensured quality and timeliness of the
field work by conducting monitoring visits in all the regions.
The data were collected by the trained surveyors through the questionnaire prepared for interviewing the
farmers cultivating cannabis, stopped cultivating cannabis, never grown cannabis and head man of the
village to know his perception regarding the cannabis cultivation. The questionnaire also covered to know
socioeconomic aspects of the farmers, reasons for growing, accessibility of loan for the crop and other licit
crops, access to other financial institutions and other aid organizations in the area. All the questionnaires
were reviewed by the regional Survey Coordinators and sent to UNODC or MCN central survey section.
The data were entered by the data clerks based in Ministry of Counter Narcotics (MCN) under the
supervision of Data Management Programmer of UNODC, survey section.
47
48
Map 5: Sampling frame and selected blocks for the cannabis satellite survey, 2009
p g y g ,
TA J I K I S T A N
U Z B E K I S TA N
TU RKM EN ISTAN
Badakhshan
Jawzjan
Kunduz
Balkh Takhar
Faryab Samangan
Baghlan
Sari Pul
Panjshir
Nuristan
Badghis
Bamyan Parwan Kapisa
Kunar
Laghman
Kabul Legend
Wardak
Nangarhar
Hirat
Ghor Logar Cannabis images received
Day kundi
Paktiya
Not acquired
Ghazni Khost
Sampling frame-2009
Uruzgan Provincial boundary
Farah Paktika
International boundary
Zabul
PA K I S T A N Disricts boundary
Hilmand Kandahar
IRAN
Nimroz
0 75 150 300
Km
Geographic projection: WGS 84
Selection of grids for remote sensing survey

From the 464 grids, 147 were selected with a random sampling procedure for the remote sensing survey. In
total, 128 very high resolution images (Geoeye and Quickbird) could be acquired and were interpreted
with visual interpretation technique.
Ground truth information with field visits was collected in accessible locations. The ample images were
taken from the cannabis field in different stages with latitude and longitudinal directions during the village
survey and monitoring visits of the field. These images were used for verification of the satellite images in
order to interpret and estimate the cannabis area cultivation.
However, the ground truths for the provinces of high security areas like Hilmand, Uruzgan, and Zabul
were not possible to collect by the surveyors. For this air assets were sought with the special help of INL.
In line with this, an air mission was undertaken for selected areas of Uruzgan, Kandahar, Zabul and
Hilmand in a DC3 air-craft fitted with high resolution camera on 14th December 09. Although the timing of
the flight was delayed due to maintenance of the air-craft and most of the cannabis fields were harvested in
this time. In fact the air mission was successful for identifying the signature of cannabis in the satellite
image. Further more the image interpretation and land estimation for cannabis was done by the remote
sensing experts of the survey unit in close coordination with Vienna ICMP unit.
Picture 7: A surveyor using GPS
Location of cannabis field recorded using GPS
Ground truth collection

Ground truth information was collected in Badakhshan and Nangarhar through a segment survey (GPS
points and field mapping). The collection of ground truth in most of the Southern region was difficult for
the surveyors and survey Coordinators. Aerial observation was used to complement ground truth in high
risk areas.
49
Picture 8: Cannabis field interpreted from the satellite images
50
Picture 9: Aerial ground truth collection
Cannabis plants reaped and left for drying - Dried cannabis with tent for ‘garda’ extraction
Uruzgan - Oblique aerial photo on field
Cannabis field in Kandahar province- Oblique Cannabis field in Kandahar province- Satellite
aerial photo image
Cannabis field in Hilmand province- Oblique aerial Cannabis field in Hilmand province- Satellite
photo image
Foucs Group Discussions

A focus group (FG) is a form of discussion in which a group of people are asked about their attitude
towards the objective they have been asked to answer. Questions are asked by the facilitator (Survey
Coordinators) in an interactive group setting where participants are free to talk with other group members
regarding the cannabis cultivation and its economic diversification. Focus group was conducted with
farmers who cultivated cannabis in 2009. The main themes were to get information on cannabis planting,
harvesting methods and yield. For the focus group discussions, 8 to 10 villages per region were sampled at
random, in total 57 villages.
Cannabis Yield Observation Survey

The focus group discussions revealed considerable difference in cannabis processing methodologies, yield
and grading/quality of products. Therefore, practical observations on yield processing were carried out
during the cannabis harvest and cannabis garda processing with selected farmers from the focus groups. 44
fields were identified, 35 of them with mono-crop cannabis, the others with cannabis in mixed cultivation.
51
Farmers were interviewed on the yield obtained from a previously identified field, including all yield
qualities, as well as on the cannabis extraction method used, cannabis seed yield, timing and duration of
harvesting, drying, and garda extraction, people involved and hashish production.
Capacity Building
UNODC and MCN Survey Coordinators and Assistant Coordinators were trained through following
training workshops:
• Training of trainers to the Survey Coordinators (SC) and assistant survey coordinators of UNODC
and MCN
• Training to the surveyors hired by the SCs
• Training to data clerks on data cleaning procedure by the UNODC data programmer
Estimations
Area estimation
The estimated cannabis area in Afghanistan in 2009 is presented as a range, from 10,000 ha to 24,000 ha.
The range expresses the uncertainty associated with the estimation.
The lower limit of the range is the best-estimate of the remote sensing survey (10,226 ha, rounded to
10,000 ha). The confidence interval at 95% is 5,000 ha to 17,000 ha.
The remote sensing survey was conducted for the first time with limited ground reference information
available. Certain types of cannabis cultivation such as cultivation in kitchen gardens, mixed crops, and
cannabis along field bunds are difficult or impossible to detect with the methodology applied. The amount
of cannabis cultivation of these types could not be estimated. It is assumed that the best estimate of the
remote sensing survey represents a minimum estimate. It was therefore used to establish the lower limit of
the area estimation range.
Information on the cannabis area per village and the proportion of cannabis of the arable land of the
villages was collected through the village survey. In Kandahar province, cross-checks with the agricultural
area existing in the survey area revealed that the cannabis area and overall arable land from the village
survey were grossly over-estimated. Thus, the area data from villages in Kandahar provinces was not used.
The data from all other provinces did not have this problem and was used to calculate a cannabis area
estimate at the national level. For Kandahar, the result from the remote sensing survey was used. The total
area estimated based on this information was 24,111 ha (village survey-based estimate). As in most
provinces, the village survey area estimate was higher than the remote sensing estimate, the village survey-
based estimate was used to establish the upper limit of the range.
Yield and production
Cannabis yield was estimated based on the results of the cannabis yield observation survey. This survey
was conducted in January 2010, when farmers actually processed the harvested and dried cannabis plants
to obtain cannabis resin. During focus group interviews in November 2009, farmers and specific fields
were identified for the yield observation. In January 2010, surveyors went to selected farmers and
witnessed the cannabis resin (garda) production from these fields. The garda yield of different qualities
was measured. Additional information e.g. on cannabis seed production, timing of processing, people
involved was collected.
Yield information from 35 mono-crop cannabis fields and 9 fields with mixed crops was collected. The
information from the mono-crop fields was used to calculate the average yield for all garda qualities.
Information from focus group interviews indicated that regional differences exist in processing cannabis to
obtain garda. In the North, Northeast and West of the country, the processing methods employed result in
first garda of higher quality but less quantity, whereas in the South and East, a larger proportion of first
garda is obtain, which however is of lower quantity (less resin and more plant material). Therefore, for
purposes of yield and production estimation, provinces were grouped into two regions.
52
Table 10: Regional grouping

Region: north,
northeast, west Region: south,
(N-NE-W) east, central (S-E)
BADAKHSHAN HILMAND
BADGHIS KANDAHAR
BAGHLAN LOGAR
BALKH NANGARHAR
FARAH PAKTYA
FARYAB URUZGAN
HIRAT ZABUL
JAWZJAN
TAKHAR
NIMROZ
Table 11: Cannabis resin (garda) yield by region, 2009

Average of Average of Average of Average of Average of
Region 1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda 4th garda total yield
(kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha)
N-NE-W (n=15) 51.3 53.9 31.4 na 136.7
S-E (n=20) 71.8 44.9 27.7 2.3 146.7
Weighted total
68.3 46.5 28.3 1.9 145.0
average*
Weighted total
68.3 46.5 30.2 - 145.0
average*
* Weighted by cultivation. N refers to number of fields. As fourth garda was only reported in some regions, it
was subsumed under third garda in the fact sheet.
Cannabis production for all garda qualities was estimated by multiplying the average regional yield with
the lower and upper value of the cannabis cultivation range, respectively. For this purpose, it was assumed
that 17% of cultivation took place in the N-NE-W region and 83% in the S-E region. These proportions
correspond to the cannabis cultivation areas in these regions based on the results of the remote sensing
survey.
Table 12: Cannabis garda production, 2009
3rd
Area 1st garda 2nd garda 4th garda
garda Total (kg)
proportion (kg) (kg) (kg)
Region (kg)
N-NE-W 0.17 87,806 92,289 53,819 - 233,914
S-E 0.83 605,190 378,779 233,646 18,967 1,236,582
Total lower limit 692,996 471,068 287,465 18,967 1,470,496
Rounded: 1,500 mt
N-NE-W 0.17 208,761 219,419 127,957 - 556,136

S-E 0.83 1,438,852 900,556 555,499 45,095 2,940,002
Total upper limit 1,647,613 1,119,975 683,455 45,095 3,496,138
Rounded: 3,500 mt
Thus, total cannabis production including all garda qualities was estimated to range from 1,500 mt to 3,500
mt (rounded).
Cannabis growing households

The number of cannabis cultivating households was estimated from information provided by headmen in
the sample villages on the number of households involved in cannabis cultivation compared to the total
53
number of households in the village. This number includes any kind of cannabis cultivation, i.e. it may
include households which have only small-scale cannabis cultivation, e.g. in a kitchen garden.
The proportion of cannabis cultivating households was calculated by region as the sum of all cannabis
cultivation households reported by headmen divided by the sum of all households reported by headmen.
The regional totals of households reported by headmen did not reflect the actual regional distribution of the
population in the sampling frame. Thus, the regional proportions of cannabis cultivating households were
weighted by population based on recent population estimates provided by the Central Statistical Office of
Afghanistan.
Farm-gate value of cannabis production
The farm-gate value is a function of average per hectare yield, area cultivated and average prices. Monthly
monitoring of the farm-gate price of cannabis resin (garda) shows that prices in the South are significantly
different from prices in the north. In 2009, garda prices in the south were less than half the price in the N-
NE-W region. While garda yield and production methods did not differ much between farmers in the south
and east, prices do. Thus, for the purpose of farm-gate value and income from cannabis per hectare, it was
assumed that 83% of cannabis production took place in the southern and 17% in the eastern region. These
proportions correspond to the cannabis cultivation areas in these regions based on the results of the remote
sensing survey, and are by chance nominally the same used above to calculate the proportion of cultivation
in the N-NE-W and S-E regions.
Similar to the methodology used in the Annual Opium Survey, the farm-gate value of cannabis was
calculated based on the prices observed in the monthly price monitoring in the month of harvesting/garda
production, which was January 2010. As the monthly price monitoring only collects prices of first garda,
second and third garda prices were calculated from the average price difference between first and second
and first and third garda reported by farmers in the village survey.
Table 13: Farm-gate prices of cannabis resin by region (US$/kg), January 2009
N-NE-W 68 46 27
S only 27 17 8
E only 49 27 13
Average* 58 38 20
* Simple average of provincial average prices.
Source: MCN/UNODC monthly price monitoring report, January 2010, own calculations.
Table 14: Prices of 2nd and 3rd garda reported by farmers as proportion of 1st garda, 2009
Garda2/garda1 Garda3/garda1
N-NE-W 69% 39%
South 64% 30%
East 56% 26%
Average 65% 35%
Table 15: Farm-gate value of garda (lower limit, US$)

Region 1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda Total
N-NE-W 5,926,913 4,280,475 1,433,024 11,640,411
South 13,629,869 5,433,204 1,581,337 20,644,410
East 4,918,611 1,722,533 489,392 7,130,536
Total 39,415,357
54
Table 16: Farm-gate value of garda (upper limit, US$)

Region 1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda Total
N-NE-W 14,091,366 10,176,924 3,407,045 27,675,335
South 32,405,316 12,917,561 3,759,665 49,082,542
East 11,694,106 4,095,360 1,163,540 16,953,006
Total 93,710,883
The total farm-gate value of cannabis resin (garda) in 2009 was estimated to range between US$ 39 million
and US$ 94 million (rounded).
Income from cannabis
The potential gross income per hectare from cannabis resin was calculated based on regional prices and
regional yields, using the regional divisions described above. The gross income does not take into account
expenditure, and is the potential cash income a farmer would get if he sold the total resin produced in
January 2010. The weighted average was calculated using the proportions of regional cannabis cultivation
from the remote sensing survey as weights.
Table 17: Gross income from cannabis resin per hectare (US$/ha), 2009
1st garda 2nd garda 3rd garda Total US$/hh
(US$/ha) (US$/ha) (US$/ha) (US$/ha) (rounded)
N-NE-W 3,463 2,501 837 6,801 2,106
South 1,938 773 225 2,936 1,283
East 3,518 1,232 350 5,100 1,348
Average* 3,890 1,553
Rounded 3,900 1,600
* Weighted by proportion of cannabis cultivation per region.
Farmers reported in the village survey an average of 0.4 ha of cannabis cultivation per household. On
average, cannabis farming households had a cash income of US$ 1,553 in 2009. Cannabis area cultivated
per household was highest in the south with 0.44 ha, and much lower in other regions. Due to this,
household income from cannabis shows much less regional differences than regional per hectare income.
55
4 ANNEX: PICTURES OF CANNABIS FIELDS AT DIFFERENT

STAGES, 2009
Cannabis field in Dand district, Kandahar province Cannabis field in Mohammad Agha district, Logar
(stem elongation) province (stem elongation)
Cannabis field in Sherzad district, Nagarhar Cannabis field in Ahmad Abad, Paktya province
province (mixed with maize, stem elongation) (growing stage)
Cannabis cultivation in Zhari district, Kandahar Cannabis cultivation in Arghandab, Kandahar

province (stem elongation period) province (stem elongation)
57
Cannabis field in Zhari district, Kandahar province Cannabis plant flowering stage, Dand district,
(Flowering stage) Kandahar province (flowering stage)
Cannabis mono crop field in Baharak district, Cannabis mix crop with watermelon in Baharak,
Badakhshan province (maturing stage) Badakhshan province (maturing stage)
Cannabis field in Pul-i-Hisar district, Baghlan Cannabis field in Sherzad district, Nangarhar
province (fully grown stage) (fully grown stage)
58
Cannabis field in Mizana district, Zabul province Cannabis field in Maywand, Kandahar province
(fully grown) (fully grown)
Cannabis field in Mohammad Agha district, Logar Cannabis field in Bakwa district, Farah province
province (flowering stage)
59

Null

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Null

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Government of Afghanistan

Ministry of Counter Narcotics

Vienna International Centre, PO Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria

United Nations publication FOR UNITED NATIONS USE ONLY

We take this opportunity to express our sincere condolences to his

KEY FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................................

Map 1: Cannabis risk area and selected villages, 2009 ................................................................................... 12

Commentary by the Executive Director

Antonio Maria Costa

Fact Sheet Afghanistan Cannabis Survey 2009

Cannabis cultivation1 10,000 – 24,000 ha

Botanical information on the cannabis plant11:

Picture 1: Morphological differences between male and female cannabis plants

Central Eastern Northeastern Northern Southern Western

Source: Annual Opium Poppy Surveys 2005-2009

Picture 2: Cannabis interpretation on satellite image in Sherzad district, Nangarhar province

Mazari (Balkhi) variety 58%

Spera Botay 0.5%

Chaghali tokhom 0.2%

Cannabis Cultivation pattern

Figure 3: Cannabis cropping patterns reported by farmers, 2009 (n=724)

Mixed only Mixed and on On bunds only

Mono and mixed

80% Cannabis cultivation type

70% On bunds only

Cannabis cultivation frequency

Started 2009 2009 and 1 or 2 more years since 2004

63° E 66° E 69° E 72° E 75° E

U Z B E K I S TA N Shi ki Da rwa z-i P ayi n (m am ay)

Do wl at ab ad Fa yro z Na kh che e r Ban gi

Bag hr an Kak ar Ka k-e Afg ha n Ab Ba nd Om na

Di shu 0 50 100 200 300 Samkani

km Jani Khel Jaji Maidan

63° E 66° E 69° E 72° E 75° E

U Z B E K I S TA N Shi ki Da rwa z-i P ayi n (ma ma y)

Bil C hi ra gh San gc ha rak Za ri Kho st wa Fi rin g Kira n w a Mu nj an

Kaka r Ka k-e Afgh an Ab Ba nd Om na

Dis hu 0 50 100 200 300 Paktiya

63° E 66° E 69° E

Cannabis crop calendar

Cannabis and opium cultivation

Table 2: Cannabis and opium cultivation by province, 2009

Mature female Cannabis plant with buds

Potential cannabis production

Picture 4: Stages of cannabis garda production

Traditional hashish (charas) production

1.Cannabis powder (Garda) 2. Electric motor to run machine for

5. Reprocessing hashish in the machine 6.Hashish spread in the block-frame

Hashish production by machine

Manual hashish production in the Southern region

1. Garda powder taken in hand for 2. Garda pressed with palms

Reasons for cultivating cannabis

Figure 6: Reasons for cultivating cannabis in 2009 (n = 724 farmers)

High sale price of cannabis compared to licit crops 39%

Low cost of inputs(seeds,fertilizer,labour) 21%

High demand for cannabis 10%

Resistant against disease 7%

For personal consumption 5%

No support from Government 1%

No control from Government 1%

Reason for stopping cannabis cultivation

Banned by government 33%