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

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

Strengthening national-level institutional and professional capacities of country Parties towards enhanced UNCCD monitoring and reporting – GEF 7 EA Umbrella II (GEF 7 UNCCD Enabling Activities_Umbrella II)

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

National Soil Services Centre, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture & Livestock (NSSC) - Bhutan

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

15/07/2023

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

Climate change has become inevitable, and there is a need to address this impending danger. In the Climate-Smart Village (CSV) approach, land users in Ngaru-Pongtang have implemented several technologies and innovations to address climate change impacts, and the programme has worked with 50 households on a total area of 137 acres (55 ha).

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

This approach focused on transforming Ngaru-Pontang into a Climate-Smart Village (CSV) with actions that also contribute to mitigating climate change. The programme has worked with 50 households on a total area of 137 acres (55 ha). The approach included a participatory vulnerability assessment, and extensive training and education for the land users. They were equipped with skills, technologies, and innovative practices related to climate-smart agriculture (CSA). Additionally, the approach emphasized collaborative efforts, working closely with community members to foster better engagement and cooperation.

The primary objectives of the approach were to transform Ngaru-Pontang village into a CSV and thus effectively address the challenges posed by climate change. To achieve these goals, the approach employed various methods. It involved meetings with the community members, vulnerability assessment, fostering collaboration between the community, Agriculture Research and Development Centre (ARDC) Wengkhar, and Commercial Agriculture and the Resilient Livelihood Enhancement Programme (CARLEP). The community members received comprehensive training and attended workshops on climate-smart agriculture practices.
The implementation of the approach adopted the following stages:
1. Resource and livelihood analysis carried out through a Participatory Vulnerability Assessment.
2. Based on the findings from the above assessment, a project proposal was submitted to secure funding.
3. Subsequently, discussions were held with the community members, the extension agent, and the local government to ensure collective agreement and support.
4. A detailed plan with a timeline was developed to guide project implementation and monitoring.
5. Training and workshops on CSA practices were conducted by the ARDC and the extension agent, empowering the community members to take charge of project implementation and ensure sustainability.

Key stakeholders involved in the approach included:
1. ARDC Wenkhar, which led the implementation of the project, facilitated the training and workshops, provided technical assistance, and monitored the programme's progress.
2. The Gewog administration and the extension agent played crucial roles by offering support and assistance in implementing climate-smart agriculture practices in the field.
3. The community members actively participated in various program activities, playing a pivotal role in driving the project forward.
4. The Commercial Agriculture and Resilient Livelihood Enhancement Programme (CARLEP) acted as the funding agency.

The key CSA practices implemented through this approach are soil fertility improvement technologies (composting through use of FYM and bio-slurry, vermicomposting; liquid manure, biochar, Bhutan Agri-Microbial Solution (BAMS) and hedgerow plantations), community solar-electric fencing, heat and drought tolerant crops (spring paddy, soybean, avocados, mangoes and pineapples), biogas installations and establishment of weather station.
The implementation of CSA interventions has resulted in a wide range of impacts on livelihoods, income, and enhanced climate resilience. The diversification of crops, electric fencing, and improvement in irrigation have enabled farmers to expand their cultivation area thereby directly enhancing crop production and cash income. Similarly, the integration of improved livestock farming systems along with crops and the installation of biogas plants have reduced impacts on natural resources. Farmers have gained knowledge and exposure to different climate-smart agriculture practices. The only negative impact of the measures has been extra damage to crops by wild animals.

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 main objective of the approach was to establish Ngaru-Pongtang as a CSV and showcase different CSA practices geared towards combating, mitigating and addressing climate change impacts, which can be replicated to other gewogs and Dzongkhags.

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	passive	The local community members were informed verbally and through community meeting about the project.
planning	interactive	ARDC Wengkhar, Thangrong gewog administration, gewog agriculture extension agent and the community members came together and discussed the way forward for the project.
implementation	interactive	Community members were provided with training and workshops on climate-smart agriculture and related agricultural skills. After the training and demonstrations, land users were divided into groups and made to apply these skills in their field.
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Monitoring is being sporadically conducted by ARDC Wengkhar and the gewog agriculture extension agent, but it is left to the land users to monitor their own fields.

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:

ARDC Wenkhar was responsible for deciding on what technologies and innovations to apply in the community, however, this was done based on consultation and discussions with the community members of Ngaru-Pongtang.

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)

• Consultation with the community members

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Ja

Specify who was trained:

• land users

If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

Both males and females were trained.

Form of training:

• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

The topics covered included climate-smart agriculture, sustainable land management, and good agricultural practices.

Comments:

The capacity building was conducted by the Agriculture Research Development Center (ARDC) in Wengkhar and the participants included community members. The program was coordinated, facilitated, and implemented by an extension agent in collaboration with Local Government and beneficiaries.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Ja

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

Describe/ comments:

ARDC Wengkhar and the agricultural extension agent provided all the technical advice and assistance required by the community members.

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

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

The local government was involved in the project from start till end, which enhanced their understanding and capacity to initiate and replicate similar projects in other villages.

Specify type of support:

• capacity building/ training

• Technical assistance

Give further details:

Local government officials were engaged in the capacity building programs implemented for the community and also provided technical assistance as and when required.

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Ja

Comments:

ARDC Wenkhar and the agriculture extension agent sporadically conducted monitoring and evaluation. However, the local land users are given the full responsibility to monitor their own fields and seek assistance when required.

If yes, is this documentation intended to be used for monitoring and evaluation?

Nee

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Ja

• Vulnerability Assessment

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

ARDC Wengkhar conducted a resource and livelihoods analysis through vulnerability assessment before designing and implementng the project in the community.

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

Indicate the annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach in US$:

55920.82

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

The funding was through Commercial Agriculture and Resilient Livelihoods Enhancement Programme (CARLEP) funded by International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

Ja

If yes, specify type(s) of support, conditions, and provider(s):

Material inputs such as seeds and seedlings, organic fertilizers, sprinkler pipes, and green shade net were provided through the project.

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• agricultural

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

Comments:

The project beneficiaries arranged their own family labour or through informal labour exchange model.

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)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

The land users have built their capacity, improved their production and cash income which should enable them to sustain the project activities.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Capacity building and technical assistance on CSA and SLM were provided.
Gained knowledge and skills on CSA practices
Were able to increase crop production through CSA interventions
Were provided with an assured market for their produce

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Built human and natural capital through capacity building and implementation of CSA practices.
Enhanced community resilience to climate change impacts

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?
The approach didn't address the pest problem, specifically the vertebrate pest adequately.	Explore additional funding to support electric fencing and if possible chain link fencing.
Farmers' hesitance to adopt technology.	Create adequate awareness prior to actual design an implementation of the project.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Saanogo, D, Sail, M., & Camara, B. A.. (2020). The climate-smart village approach: putting communities at the heart of restoration. Tropenbos International, Wageningen.

Available from where? Costs?

https://www.tropenbos.org/file.php/2385/etfrn-news-60-sanogo-the-climate-smart-village-approach.pdf

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Aggarwal, P. K., Jarvis, A., Campbell, B. M., & Zougmore, R. (2018). The climate-smart village approach: Framework of an integrative strategy for scaling up adaptation options in agriculture. Ecology and Society, 23(1).

Available from where? Costs?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322765373_The_climate-smart_village_approach_Framework_of_an_integrative_strategy_for_scaling_up_adaptation_options_in_agriculture

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

The climate smart villages approach

URL:

https://www.grida.no/resources/4928

Title/ description:

THE CLIMATE-SMART VILLAGE APPROACH: FRAMEWORK OF AN INTEGRATIVE STRATEGY FOR SCALING UP ADAPTATION OPTIONS IN AGRICULTURE

URL:

https://ccafs.cgiar.org/resources/publications/climate-smart-village-approach-framework-integrative-strategy-scaling