Facilitation of community-based pasture management initiatives [طاجيكستان]
- تاريخ الإنشاء:
- تحديث:
- جامع المعلومات: Mizrob Amirbekov
- المحرر: –
- المراجعون: David Streiff, Alexandra Gavilano, Joana Eichenberger
Mountain Societies Development Support Programme - Aga Khan Foundation
approaches_2444 - طاجيكستان
عرض الأقسام
توسيع الكل طي الكل1. معلومات عامة
1.2 تفاصيل الاتصال بالأشخاص الرئيسيين لمصدر المعلومات والمؤسسات المعنية بتقييم وتوثيق النهج
متخصص في الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي:
Pachova Nevelina
Palm
اسم المشروع الذي سهّل توثيق/تقييم النهج (إذا كان ذلك على صلة)
Sustainable Land Management in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai Mountains (PALM Project / NCCR)اسم المشروع الذي سهّل توثيق/تقييم النهج (إذا كان ذلك على صلة)
Pilot Program for Climate Resilience, Tajikistan (WB / PPCR)اسم المؤسسة (المؤسسات) التي سهلت توثيق/تقييم النهج (إذا كان ذلك على صلة)
Kyrgyzstan Mountain Societies Development Support Programme, Aga Khan Development Network (MSDSP KG) - قرغيزستان1.3 الشروط المتعلقة باستخدام البيانات الموثقة من خلال WOCAT
يوافق جامع المعلومات والشخص (لاشخاص) الرئيسي لمصدر المعلومات على الشروط المتعلقة باستخدام البيانات الموثقة من خلال WOCAT:
نعم
2. وصف نهج الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي
2.1 وصف موجز للنهج
Initiation of community-based solutions to slow down pasture degradation, and to improve pasture use and management in three pilot Jamoats of upland Tajikistan.
2.2 وصف تفصيلي للنهج
وصف تفصيلي للنهج:
Aims / objectives: During the Soviet times land users in Tajikistan were allowed to keep very little livestock individually and this was mainly in the vicinity of rural settlements. The majority of the livestock were managed by collective agricultural farms, which utilised different seasonal pastures. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the previously state-owned livestock was distributed among individual farmers, most of whom had limited knowledge and experience with pasture management (PM), and capacities to access the distant pastures used by the collective farms. As a consequence, the amount of livestock kept in the vicinity of rural settlements increased, leading to overgrazing and severe degradation of nearby pastures. In the framework of a project on sustainable land management in the Pamir-Alai region (PALM), funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), MSDSP facilitated the initiation of community-based solutions to the problem of pasture degradation at three pilot jamoats in Jirgital, and three in Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast (GBAO).
Methods: 1. Awareness raising and capacity building of PM issues. 2. Integration of PM issues in village development plans. 3. Grant support and community co-financing for implementation of targeted measures. 4. Monitoring of the impacts of the implemented measures as a basis for up-scaling.
Stages of implementation: 1. National pasture management experts from the Pamir Biological Institute held a training of trainers (ToT) session for MSDSP facilitators and district specialists, who conducted follow-up training on PM at the pilot communities in 2009. 2. Pilot communities identified key problems related to PM in the process of Village Development Planning facilitated by MSDSP, and prioritised targeted measures for improved PM. 3. A set of micro-project proposals were developed based on the prioritised measures, which focused on (re-) construction of roads and bridges for improved access to pastures, and construction of stables during spring/autumn, as well as summer pastures. 4. Monitoring of the impacts of the implemented measures as a basis for up-scaling.
Role of stakeholders: Community members were engaged in identifying and implementing targeted measures for addressing pasture use and management issues. Jamoat level non-governmental organisations called Social Unions for Development of Village Organizations (SUDVOs), coordinated and supported the identification and implementation of the selected projects in several village organisations. Governmental agricultural extension agents were engaged in training, and consulted in the review process. MSDSP staff facilitated the overall process and engaged in monitoring progress with implementation. PALM project staff engaged in the review, monitoring and assessment of the impacts of the supported measures.
2.3 صور عن النهج
2.5 البلد/المنطقة/المواقع التي تم تطبيق النهج فيها
البلد:
طاجيكستان
مزيد من التفاصيل حول الموقع:
Jirgatol
التعليقات:
Three pilot jamoats in the Jirgital region (Jirgital, Pildon and Yangishar), and three in Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast (GBAO), (Shitharv, Vankala and Alichur) were covered by the approach
Map
×2.6 تواريخ بدء وإنهاء تنفيذ النهج
أشر إلى سنة البدء:
2009
2.7 نوع النهج
- قائم على مشروع/برنامج
2.8 الغايات/الأهداف الرئيسية للنهج
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (rehabilitation of rural infrastructure to improve access to pastures, pasture and livestock productivity, animal diseases)
The main aim of the approach was to initiate the improved use and management of pastures, by raising awareness and knowledge on issues regarding pasture degradation and sustainable pasture management, mobilising community action, and pilot-testing selected technologies and measures for improving pasture management in highly degraded areas.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: pasture degradation, overgrazing, restricted pasture area and too many cattle garzing, lack of infrastructure (bridges, roads, shelters), lack of knowledge about pasture management
2.9 الظروف التي تمكن أو تعيق تنفيذ التقنية/التقنيات المطبقة بموجب النهج
توفر/الوصول إلى الموارد والخدمات المالية
- معيق
communities were lacking funds for infrastructure development and could therefore not invest in the construction of roads and bridges
Treatment through the SLM Approach: GEF funds were used to support communities in financing infrastructural improvements which allowed for more productive and sustainable use of available pasture resources
الإطار المؤسساتي
- معيق
Lack of capacity to deal with pasture degradation problems
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Engagement of village organisations, and social unions of village organisations (SUDVO) in addressing pasture management issues at six pilot jamoats
الإطار القانوني (حيازة الأراضي، وحقوق استخدام الأراضي والمياه)
- معيق
Limited clarity regarding responsibilities and lack of incentives for sustainable pasture management
Treatment through the SLM Approach: MSDSP and PALM project members recommended the development of a pasture management law that addresses those legal constrains
The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights moderately hindered the approach implementation there is no law about pasture management in Tajikistan, therefore it was difficult to regulate the process
المعرفة حول الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي، والوصول إلى الدعم الفني
- معيق
technical knowledge about pasture management was lacking as during Soviet times people were not allowed to keep a lot of livestock
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Community members of village organisations and relevant government experts were trained in various issues of pasture management
3. المشاركة وأدوار الأطراف المعنية
3.1 أصحاب المصلحة المعنيون بالنهج وأدوارهم
- مستخدمو الأراضي المحليون/المجتمعات المحلية
Village organisations
Only 20% of the participants were women, since men are responsible for managing the livestock, while women are concerned with livestock products only
Elderly members of the communities were engaged in discussions on the possible solutions
- متخصصون في الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي / مستشارون زراعيون
Governmental agricultural advisors participated in the training.
- الحكومة الوطنية (المخططون، صانعو القرار)
Agrarian University in Jirgatol, Pamir Biological Institute
- pilot communities
3.2 انخراط مستخدمي الأراضي المحليين/المجتمعات المحلية في المراحل المختلفة للنهج
انخراط مستخدمي الأراضي المحليين/المجتمعات المحلية | حدد من شارك وصف الأنشطة | |
---|---|---|
المبادرة/التحفيز | غير موجود | |
التخطيط | تفاعلي | Members of village organisations were involved in training and planning on pasture management, and actively participated in discussions |
التنفيذ | التعبئة الذاتية | The village organisations developed their own project ideas and submitted those proposals to MSDSP and other funders |
الرصد/التقييم | تفاعلي | Land users were engaged in the monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of the implemented projects |
Research | تفاعلي | The Pamir-Biological Institute and the Institute of Botany under the Academy of Sciences were engaged in research and technical consultations |
3.4 اتخاذ القرار بشأن اختيار تقنية/تقنيات الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي
هل تم اتخاذ قرارات بشأن اختيار التقنية(التقنيات)؟:
- pilot communities
اشرح:
Community members were engaged in identifying and implementing targeted measures for addressing pasture use and management issues.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by pilot communities and facilitators. Community members were engaged in identifying and implementing targeted measures for addressing pasture use and management issues.
4. الدعم الفني وبناء القدرات وإدارة المعرفة
4.1 بناء القدرات/التدريب
هل تم تقديم التدريب لمستخدمي الأراضي / الأطراف المعنيين الآخرين؟:
نعم
حدد من تم تدريبه:
- مستخدمو الأراضي
- موظفون ميدانيون/ مستشارون
شكل التدريب:
- دورات
المواضيع المغطاة:
Short training courses were provided for land user, field staff/agricultural advisors
4.2 خدمة استشارية
هل يملك مستخدمو الأراضي وصولا إلى خدمة استشارية؟:
نعم
- through trained experts
وصف/تعليقات:
Name of method used for advisory service: Engineering support and technical consultations
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities
4.3 تعزيز المؤسسات (التطوير التنظيمي)
هل تم إنشاء أو تعزيز مؤسسات من خلال هذا النهج؟:
- نعم، إلى حد كبير
حدد المستوى (المستويات) التي تم فيها تعزيز أو إنشاء المؤسسات:
- محلي
حدد نوع الدعم:
- بناء القدرات/التدريب
اعط مزيدا من التفاصيل:
village organisations were trained
4.4 الرصد والتقييم
هل يشكل الرصد والتقييم جزءا من النهج؟:
نعم
التعليقات:
economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: changes in economic benefits for households before and after implementation of project
bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: changes in vegetation coverage, edible grass species, etc.
area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Established at the start of project implementation
There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Some areas were grazed although they should not have been, project staff then talked to the responsible people in the village to ask about the causes for this and to try and initiate changes in practice.
4.5 البحوث
هل كانت البحوث جزءًا من النهج؟:
نعم
- pasture management
أعط تفاصيل إضافية وأشر إلى من قام بالبحوث:
Aimed at problem, option and impact assessment
Research was carried out on-farm
5. التمويل والدعم المادي الخارجي
5.1 الميزانية السنوية لمكون الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي في النهج المذكور
إذا لم تكن الميزانية السنوية الدقيقة معروفة، قم بالإشارة إلى نطاقها:
- 10,0000-2,000
التعليقات (على سبيل المثال المصادر الرئيسية للتمويل/الجهات المانحة الرئيسية):
Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (PALM): 70.0%; national non-government (MSDSP): 30.0%
5.2 الدعم المالي/المادي المقدم لمستخدمي الأراضي
هل حصل مستخدمو الأراضي على دعم مالي/ مادي لتنفيذ التقنية/ التقنيات؟:
كلا
5.3 إعانات لمدخلات محددة (بما في ذلك العمالة)
- بنى تحتية
حدد المدخلات التي تم دعمها | إلى أي مدى | حدد الإعانات |
---|---|---|
طرق | ممول جزئيا | |
bridges, shelters | ممول جزئيا | |
إذا كان العمل من قبل مستخدمي الأراضي مدخلاً جوهريًا، فهل كان:
- تطوعي
5.4 الائتمان
هل تم توفير ائتمان في إطار نهج أنشطة الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي؟:
كلا
6. تحليل الأثر والتصريحات الختامية
6.1 آثار النهج
هل ساعد النهج مستخدمي الأراضي على تنفيذ وصيانة تقنيات الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي؟:
- لا
- نعم، قليلا
- نعم، باعتدال
- نعم، إلى حد كبير
Reduced pressures on pastures in the vicinity of rural settlements
هل ساهم النهج في تمكين الفئات المحرومة اجتماعيا واقتصاديا؟:
- لا
- نعم، قليلا
- نعم، باعتدال
- نعم، إلى حد كبير
Elderly herders with improved access to health facilities
هل أدى النهج إلى تحسن في مسائل حيازة الأراضي / حقوق المستخدمين التي أعاقت تنفيذ تقنيات الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي؟:
- لا
- نعم، قليلا
- نعم، باعتدال
- نعم، إلى حد كبير
talks with the government were started to make way for a law on pasture management
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
- لا
- نعم، قليلا
- نعم، باعتدال
- نعم، إلى حد كبير
Strong interest by other communities but limited financial means for replication
Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
- لا
- نعم، قليلا
- نعم، باعتدال
- نعم، إلى حد كبير
Improved access to fodder, reduced loss of livestock, etc
Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
- لا
- نعم، قليلا
- نعم، باعتدال
- نعم، إلى حد كبير
The primary beneficiaries are the groups with a medium income
6.2 المحفز الرئيسي لقيام مستخدمي الأراضي بتنفيذ الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي
- زيادة الإنتاج
Increased pasture area and livestock productivity, reduced loss of livestock, reduced labour inputs
- الوعي البيئي
Increased awareness of the degradation of pastures
- well-being and livelihoods improvement
Improved convenience, reduced conflicts over livestock tramping and grazing of croplands
6.3 استدامة أنشطة النهج
هل يمكن لمستخدمي الأراضي المحافظة على استدامة ما تم تنفيذه من خلال النهج (بدون دعم خارجي)؟:
- نعم
إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم، صف كيف:
The village organisations have the responsibility to teach their community members
6.4 نقاط قوة/مزايا النهج
نقاط القوة/ المزايا/ الفرص من وجهة نظر جامع المعلومات أو غيره من الاشخاص الرئيسيين لمصدر المعلومات |
---|
Reduction of conflicts over resource use and strengthened social capital (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: utilise the improved social capital for addressing other pressing environmental and community development issues) |
Improved income from livestock provides a strong incentive for sustaining the established infrastructure (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: a proportion of the obtained income should be reinvested in maintenance e.g. through collection of user fees ) |
Improved environmental conditions in the vicinity of rural settlements, and reduced labour inputs into livestock breeding (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: capitalise on those environmental improvements through the development of alternative income-generating activities such as bee-keeping and eco-tourism that will limit the need for further increases in livestock numbers) |
6.5 نقاط الضعف/ العيوب في المنهج وطرق التغلب عليها
نقاط الضعف/ المساوىء/ المخاطر من وجهة نظر جامع المعلومات أو غيره من الاشخاص الرئيسيين لمصدر المعلومات | كيف يمكن التغلب عليها؟ |
---|---|
Improved access to new pastures and possible further increases in livestock numbers may lead to their degradation in the future | Community members and village organisations have to make sure that the new pastures are being used in a sustainable manner e.g. through controlled grazing and pasture rotation, designation of no-grazing areas in pristine forests in the vicinity of new pastures, etc. |
The approach contributes to improve the well-being of the medium income groups of the communities in question, as accessing distant pastures is most often not a problem for the better-off, while the poor often have only limited or no livestock | use as part of the generated additional income in the community for support of poor households |
The approach is economically beneficial but difficult to up-scale due to the high initial investment costs | identify appropriate mechanisms for stimulating replication through relevant legal and policy incentives or alternative financing |
7. المراجع والروابط
7.1 طرق جمع/مصادر المعلومات
- زيارات ميدانية، مسوحات ميدانية
- مقابلات مع مستخدمي الأراضي
الروابط والوحدات المواضيعية
توسيع الكل طي الكلالروابط
لا يوجد روابط
الوحدات المواضيعية
لا يوجد وحدات مواضيعية