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

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

HELVETAS (Swiss Intercooperation)

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

25/08/2015

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

2.1 Short description of the Approach

An approach to community participation in the sustainable management of natural resources

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

The main objective of the intervention was to reduce the surface run-off and sediment flow from the selected degraded watershed, with soil and water conservation measures through community participation.


Agha Khan Foundation and representatives from the selected Community Development Councils (CDC) surveyed the area and discussed the main land use problems. On the basis of feasibility surveys, potential SLM technologies were identified and implemented. Contour lines were prepared with the help of an A-frame and lime. Several men from Zai Mahmood village were employed as daily wage workers for the technology implementation works. The land users used their own tools for trench excavation. Each worker excavated on an average one trench per day. The daily wage was 250 AFS/USD.

The project was executed over two years. In addition to the structural measures, training and exposure visits for watershed management committee and pasture committee members, reseeding of more areas, tree plantation campaigns and group-based women vegetable farming were realized. Women were employed for seed collection work with cash for work approach. The area was protected from grazing and shrub cutting pressure. Seeds of different fodder varieties and shrubs were also cultivated.

Since the realization of the project in 2008, soil and vegetation cover has improved, people’s knowledge about soil and water conservation has increased, flash floods have been controlled and discharge in the spring located below the watershed has increased by about 40%. AKF continues to support the target communities with community development and institution building. The water-shed work is sustained by a watershed and pasture management committee appointed by the people from three respective CDCs.

The Community-Based Natural Resource Management approach is documented by Sustainable Land Management Project implemented/HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation which is funded by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation with close support and cooperation of the Agha Khan Foundation (AKF).
The watershed project was funded by AusAID. The Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) facilitated the implementation by the community. The project was implemented in Zai Mahmood mountain slope area in Zai Mahmood village, Shiber district, Bamyan Province. The village, located downstream from the site, experienced problems such as excessive surface runoff/flash floods, snow avalanches, soil erosion, lack of drinking water, lack of soil moisture at the site.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

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

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

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 (Disaster Risk Reduction, Pasture Improvement, Gender Equity, Income Generation)

Strengthen the capacity (organizational and technical), of the community to: restore their degraded lands, demonstrate multi-purpose soil and water conservation measures, reduce floods and snow avalanches, improve pastures, improve gender equity and the involvement of social disadvantaged groups, employment and income generation

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of knowledge in terms of sustainable watershed management; poverty; drought; floods and avalanches

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

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

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	interactive	Meetings and Workshops for men and women
planning	interactive	With CDC members, mainly men for watershed works
implementation	external support	Interactive, Cash for work, Contributions from communities as well
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Ad hoc observations
Research	interactive	Analyzing technology performance and making adjustments if required

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

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:

AKF conducted awareness workshops before project implementation.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. land users implemented the technology after receiving guidelines from SLM specialists.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Ja

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Vegetable farming for women; soil and water conservation; watershed management; pasture management. Training was mainly on-the-job, and awareness was raised through public meetings, site visits and demonstrations.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Ja

Describe/ comments:

On-site visits by DAIL (Department of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock; Key elements: Pasture management, Site selection

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; The government or other advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities although the staff turnover rate in government sector is high. DAIL Bamyan office has the technical capacity but not adequate financial resources.

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

Give further details:

CDCs and District Development Assembly (DDA) in terms of financial and capacity building of participating

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Ja

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through measurements; indicators: Biomass before and after
technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users through observations; indicators: growth of saplings, shrubs and fodder grasses (alfalfa)
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users through measurements; indicators: Water availablity, food security, income
economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: fodder production, income
area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: areas where technology was applied
no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through measurements; indicators: CDCs and men and women involved
management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: area protected or not

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Women has given some more chances for the participation but still there is long way to go. There were some technology refinements and adjustments in project management.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Ja

Specify topics:

• sociology
• economics / marketing
• ecology
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

However there are no publications to verify that. Research was carried out on-farm

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 10,000-100,000

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international: 50.0%; national non-government: 30.0%; local community / land user(s): 20.0%

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Nee

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

Nee

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

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:

Although the participating CDCs indicate that they will continue to manage the watershed properly

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Increase in vegetation cover
People knowledge regarding SWC improved
Increase in spring water
Flash flood controlled
Watershed and pasture management committees formed

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Disturbance in NRM / soil disturbance	Minimize the soil disturbance, and compact the excavated soil
Increase in mice	Compact the excavated soil, other control measures
Plant growth is slow due to high elevation	Choose adaptable species
No watershed benefit sharing mechanism in place	Benefit mechanism be developed in a participatory way and agreed by the land users and other stakeholders

7.1 Methods/ sources of information