Approaches

Small Watershed Comprehensive Control [China]

  • Creation:
  • Update:
  • Compiler:
  • Editor:
  • Reviewer:

approaches_2398 - China

Completeness: 75%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)
Department of Resources and Environmental Science, Beijing Normal University (Department of Resources and Environmental Science, Beijing Normal University) - China

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

Small Watershed Comprehensive Development
technologies

Small Watershed Comprehensive Development [China]

Controlling a small watershed comprehensively with structural, vegetative, management, and agronomic measures based on harvesting area of ground water and underground water, to improve the production and conservation of land.

  • Compiler: Jun XIA

2. Description of the SLM Approach

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Controlling a small watershed comprehensively with structural, vegetative, management, and agronomic measures based on harvesting area of ground water and underground water, to improve the production and conservation of land.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: The overall purpose of the approach is to prevent soil and water loss and better environment. The aim of the approach is to control soil and water loss by combined measures.

Stages of implementation: (1) Structural measure; (2) Combine vegetative measure, agronomic measure and management measures.

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

Country:

China

Region/ State/ Province:

Hubei province

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

Indicate year of initiation:

1956

2.7 Type of Approach

  • project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities ( Prevent Flooding, Irrigation, Breed aquatic biology)

The main objectives of the approach were achieving the more sustainable soil and water use by the ways and means which support a SWC technology.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Financing Inadequate

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

availability/ access to financial resources and services
  • hindering

Substantive investment in small basin development could produce inconspicuous benefit at first 1-2 years for land users, so changing land use pattern so as to get quick benefit as early as possible.

Treatment through the SLM Approach:

legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights)
  • enabling

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights moderately helped the approach implementation: In China, state has land ownership and farmers have land use rights a period of time by land contract and leasing land from communities. This is helpful to the small watershed comprehensive development.

knowledge about SLM, access to technical support
  • hindering

There is not a mature and universal SWC design being followed.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Experts are invited to constitute programming design by summarizing experiences.

3. Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

  • local land users/ local communities

Existing groups of land users; Working land users were mainly men (Men are the main labours in the SWC implementation.)

  • teachers/ school children/ students
  • national government (planners, decision-makers)

Most of them are agricultural and water resource departments of the county.

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
Involvement of local land users/ local communities Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation external support public meetings; They were involved in the program by taking part in public meeting to understand the approach.
planning interactive public meetings; Participating
implementation external support responsibility for major steps; Participating
monitoring/ evaluation interactive
Research interactive Casual labor.

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:
  • mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users
Explain:

consultative.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by politicians / leaders. consultative.

4. Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Ja

Specify who was trained:
  • land users
Form of training:
  • farmer-to-farmer
  • demonstration areas
  • public meetings
Subjects covered:

Teaching them how to implement SWC items and soil & water conservation knowledge, etc.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Ja

Specify whether advisory service is provided:
  • at permanent centres
Describe/ comments:

Small Watershed Integrated Harness; Key elements: Fund from government, Water and soil loss very severely, Aid by local government; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: government's existing extension system 2) Advisory service was carried out through: government's existing extension system; Extension staff: mainly government employees 3) Target groups for extension: planners; Activities: training

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; At each government level, there is a SWC division which is in charge of SWC activities including extension.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?
  • yes, greatly
Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:
  • local
Specify type of support:
  • financial
  • capacity building/ training

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Ja

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None

technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through measurements; indicators: None

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None

area treated aspects were None monitored by 0 through measurements; indicators: None

no. of land users involved aspects were None monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: None

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Ja

Specify topics:
  • economics / marketing
  • ecology
  • technology
Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5. Financing and external material support

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:
  • 100,000-1,000,000
Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (national - Central government): 60.0%; other (-): 40.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Ja

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

  • equipment
Specify which inputs were subsidised To which extent Specify subsidies
machinery fully financed
tools fully financed
  • agricultural
Specify which inputs were subsidised To which extent Specify subsidies
seeds fully financed
fertilizers fully financed
seedlings and biocides fully financed
  • infrastructure
Specify which inputs were subsidised To which extent Specify subsidies
community infrastructure fully financed
If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:
  • paid in cash

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Ja

Specify conditions (interest rate, payback, etc.):

Interest rate charged: 2.0%

Interest was lower than market rate.

6. Impact analysis and concluding statements

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Reconstructing the slope land to terraces and planting much more cash crops and fruit trees instead of traditional food crops.

Did the Approach improve issues of land tenure/ user rights that hindered implementation of SLM Technologies?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

The policies of land contract distribute land to individuals so that land users who involved in SWC activities need to be organized together for implementation of the SWC. The organization need much time and hard work. The problem is likely to be overcome in the near future. Farmers worry that their land would be transferred to others.

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
  • uncertain
If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

If a SWC investment exceeds the benefit, farmers will lose interest.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
SWC approach is mainly actualized by government, the land users do not concern much.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The comprehensive SWC measues being applied in a small basin producing farthest benefit. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: More demonstration areas and experiences need to set up to extend in large area.)
Government organize programming design, so that the benefit of the user and society are more obvious. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Making out SWC favourablepolicies and strengthening propaganda and education in order that everyone could concern eco-environment protection and construction.)

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view How can they be overcome?
Cost much!!
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Comprehensive development of a small watershed is a systematic engineering, it need scientific planning and much more input. It is difficult for farmers themselves to do these. Enhancing training local SWC staffs and technicians.

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules