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)?

10/11/2011

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

Sustainable implementation of watershed management through appropriate SLM technologies, formation of organizational structures and capacity building of stakeholders

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

The overall objective of the community-based watershed management project implemented at Sar-e-Ahangaran was to reduce water induced disaster risks and improve people’s livelihoods. The project was implemented by Catholic Relief Services (CRS) with people’s support and funding assistance from USAID.

About 67 hectares of degraded land has been rehabilitated since 2009 through various soil and water conservation measures like stone walls, contour trenches and plantation of fodder species such as alfalfa. The local communities are also protecting the treated areas from grazing and shrub cutting.

With facilitation from CRS, a 15-member watershed management committee was appointed by the participating families. This was important for organizing watershed related works and for the sustainability of project interventions. Some rules for managing the selected watershed were also formulated in a participatory way. For instance, if anyone is found grazing animals at the site, he has to give one sheep to the watershed committee as a fine.
CRS has provided training and technical support to the watershed committee members and workers for project implementation and monitoring. The daily workers were selected from the local communities by the watershed committee and paid in cash as per national norms for their labor. CRS also organized awareness raising workshops regarding environmental conservation and water-shed management and the entire community including teachers and students participated in these village events.

As a result of Sar-e-Ahangaran watershed management project, the people have a more positive attitude towards natural resource management. The formation and capacity building of the watershed management committee is a step towards ensuring long-term sustainability of the project outputs and community owner-ship. The watershed committee is not yet registered with the government but for future sustainability, this will be an important activity. The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is in the process of formulating a comprehensive community-based natural resource management strategy. Once in place, the Sar-e-Ahangaran community can take advantage of that strategy if the watershed committee is formally registered with the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (Bamyan).

The Community-Based Watershed Management approach is documented by Sustainable Land Management Project /HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation which is funded by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation with close support and cooperation of the Catholic Relief Service (CRS).

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, Rural Livelihoods Improvement)

The overall objective of the project was to reduce watershed induced disaster risks and improve rural livelihoods through SLM technologies and community based sustainable approaches

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of people’s knowledge regarding sustainable management of natural resources and disaster risk reduction, lack of knowledge, technical and organisational capacities on sustainable land management technologies for degraded lands

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	CRS discussed land use problems and formulated the project. Project site was selected by the participating families and respective CDCs
planning	interactive	CDC and watershed members were involved in the planning but not the whole community
implementation	external support	Implementation was by the local communities with cash for work approach
monitoring/ evaluation	self-mobilization	Voluntary monitoring group to look after the environment. Also joint monitoring by project stakeholders
Research	passive

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:

The area was selected by the community

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. However, workers were selected by the watershed committee members in consultation with their community development councils (CDCs).

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Ja

Specify who was trained:

• land users

• Project field officers, Land users, CDC and Watershed Management Committee members, teacher and students, both women and men

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• farmer-to-farmer

Form of training:

• organizing courses

Subjects covered:

contour trench and stone wall technologies, tree planting, importance of pasture management and watershed management

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Ja

Describe/ comments:

CRS provided continuous advice; Key elements: increase awareness by forming a watershed committee, technical support of the committee

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; The government or other advisory service is still inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities. The government authorities visited the project only once, at the end of the project. They did not provide much support; however, as the land belongs formally to the state, they did not have any objections for applying watershed management measures.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, moderately

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Give further details:

CDCs and watershed management committees. Schools teachers and students also received training

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Ja

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Water quality and quantitative measurements

technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users, other through observations; indicators: ad hoc field visits and monitoring of structural quality

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Hosuehold survey

economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Household survey

area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Other areas where technology has been applied

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by land users through measurements; indicators: Selecting the beneficiaries

management of Approach aspects were None monitored by land users through observations; indicators: Monitoring the community which looks after the pasture management

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: especially with regard to organisational structure for monitoring works

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Ja

• Farm research

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Topics included technology functions, vegetation status before and after project, monitoring of spring (located below) water quality and quantity.

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 non-government: 99.0%; local community / land user(s): 1.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

Nee

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:

but CRS continues to build capacities of watershed committees and support plantation of fodder species so that people get direct benefits and the project is sustained.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Less damage to some agricultural land located below the watershed sites due to flash floods
Prevention of snow slide
Increased water in the spring
Plant coverage of the area increased
Prevention from soil erosion

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?
Watershed management committee is not registered	CRS should facilitate registration of the committee with the Department of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock in Bamyan
People are not taking care of the plantations	People must understand the importance of plantations. The project should figure out the reasons why people are not interested in plantation activities and adjust approaches accordingly

7.1 Methods/ sources of information