1.2 تفاصيل الاتصال بالأشخاص الرئيسيين لمصدر المعلومات والمؤسسات المعنية بتقييم وتوثيق النهج

اسم المشروع الذي سهّل توثيق/تقييم النهج (إذا كان ذلك على صلة)

Sustainable Soil Management Programme, Nepal (SSMP)

اسم المؤسسة (المؤسسات) التي سهلت توثيق/تقييم النهج (إذا كان ذلك على صلة)

HELVETAS (Swiss Intercooperation)

1.3 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

1.4 المراجع الخاصة باستبيان(استبيانات) تقنيات الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي

2.1 وصف موجز للنهج

Participatory technology testing and adaptation through farmer-led experiments

2.2 وصف تفصيلي للنهج

وصف تفصيلي للنهج:

Farmer-led experimentation is a type of action research initiated and carried out by farmers in their own fields. This approach enables farmers to identify technological options suited to local agroecological and socioeconomic conditions. The farmer-led experimentation process is taken up within existing farmer groups. This approach is closely related to the 'participatory innovation development' and the 'participatory technology development' approaches as discussed in Kolff et al. (2005). Simple experiments are usually replicated in five to ten farmers' fields per group. Generally, the whole of each experimental plot from each field is harvested and the yield recorded. Field implementation, group visits, and observations are carried out by the farmers themselves. The processing of results is done in groups together with the support staff from the facilitating organisation. These farmers are very likely to adopt tested technologies that are shown to be better for meeting their needs. The results are also used by support staff and shared with other organisations, and provide input for dissemination through farmer-to-farmer diffusion.
Farmers play a leading role in all steps of the process, starting from problem identification to planning, implementation, and evaluation of the experiments. This ensures that farmers are the driving force in the research process and not mere recipients of research findings that have been generated elsewhere. The detailed implementation plan is discussed within the groups and individual and collective responsibilities are assigned. The experimental site, individual implementing farmers, group visits, and results-sharing meetings are decided on by group consensus. Some observations are recorded by the implementing farmers. Promising innovations are then identified based on the collective evaluation of the tested treatments. Technical and other facilitation support is provided by organisations active in the area.

2.3 صور عن النهج

2.5 البلد/المنطقة/المواقع التي تم تطبيق النهج فيها

2.7 نوع النهج

• قائم على مشروع/برنامج

2.8 الغايات/الأهداف الرئيسية للنهج

Local farmers collectively solving problems by identifying and using the most appropriate local solutions. Local farmers designing, testing and disseminating alternative technologies adapted to local conditions. Strengthening joint learning by farmers and development actors.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The common issues concerning farmers in growing crops include pests and diseases, yield decline, inappropriate crop varieties, and the introduction of new varieties. Rather than technicians providing farmers with ready-made solutions to their problems (that may or may not work), farmer-led experimentation allows farmers to carry out their own trials to try and solve specific problems.

2.9 الظروف التي تمكن أو تعيق تنفيذ التقنية/التقنيات المطبقة بموجب النهج

3.1 أصحاب المصلحة المعنيون بالنهج وأدوارهم

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	تفاعلي	participatory discussions and exercises, field visits, farm maps, farming and labour calendar, Activities: Identification of topics for experiment based on needs and priority, Identification of technological options (indigenous and external), Farmers developing simple and appropriate experiments, De
التخطيط	غير موجود
التنفيذ	تفاعلي	follow-up visits, discussions, Activities: Farmers implement according to the design for comparison with a control (= existing practice), Farmers note relevant observations on recording sheet. Farmers note other important observations based on their needs and interests, Technical support and discuss
الرصد/التقييم	تفاعلي	field visit to experimental site by other farmers, participatory discussion and evaluation Activities: Experimenting farmers and other farmers jointly discuss and evaluate based on direct observations of the trial and from the record sheet, Discussion on the lessons learned and identifying possible
Research	غير موجود

3.4 اتخاذ القرار بشأن اختيار تقنية/تقنيات الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي

حدد من الذي قرر اختيار التقنية/التقنيات التي سيتم تنفيذها:

• مستخدمو الأراضي وحدهم (المبادرة الذاتية)

اشرح:

Made collectively by farmers in group facilitated by organisation working with them.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up). Made by farmers in group

4.1 بناء القدرات/التدريب

هل تم تقديم التدريب لمستخدمي الأراضي / الأطراف المعنيين الآخرين؟:

نعم

حدد من تم تدريبه:

• مستخدمو الأراضي

4.3 تعزيز المؤسسات (التطوير التنظيمي)

هل تم إنشاء أو تعزيز مؤسسات من خلال هذا النهج؟:

• نعم، باعتدال

حدد المستوى (المستويات) التي تم فيها تعزيز أو إنشاء المؤسسات:

• محلي

اعط مزيدا من التفاصيل:

Technical support provided by project

4.4 الرصد والتقييم

هل يشكل الرصد والتقييم جزءا من النهج؟:

نعم

التعليقات:

bio-physical aspects were monitored by land users through observations
technical aspects were monitored by land users through observations
economic / production aspects were monitored by land users through observations
area treated aspects were monitored by land users through observations
land users involved aspects were monitored by land users through observations
management of Approach aspects were monitored by land users through observations
There were several changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: The adoption of certain technologies has occurred as a result of farmer-led experimentation. For example, a farmer-led trial of two varieties of groundnut (local and B4), in Ghadgaon, Surkhet, led to farmers starting to grow the B4 variety in an area where previously only local varieties had been growing

5.1 الميزانية السنوية لمكون الإدارة المستدامة للأراضي في النهج المذكور

التعليقات (على سبيل المثال المصادر الرئيسية للتمويل/الجهات المانحة الرئيسية):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local community / land user(s) (local resources, labour, land): 50.0%; other (Dev. project(inputs, external resources)): 50.0%

5.2 الدعم المالي/المادي المقدم لمستخدمي الأراضي

هل حصل مستخدمو الأراضي على دعم مالي/ مادي لتنفيذ التقنية/ التقنيات؟:

نعم

إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم، حدد نوع (أنواع) الدعم والشروط والمزودين:

Provided by the project for testing purposes

5.3 إعانات لمدخلات محددة (بما في ذلك العمالة)

إذا كان العمل من قبل مستخدمي الأراضي مدخلاً جوهريًا، فهل كان:

• تطوعي

6.1 آثار النهج

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:

Some farmers are implementing the approach on their own initiative. This is possible because of the low costs and limited technical requirements of the approach. Farmers exposed to the approach will be able to apply the approach again to problems that arise in their fields without the need to consult outside agencies.

6.4 نقاط قوة/مزايا النهج

نقاط القوة/ المزايا/ الفرص من وجهة نظر جامع المعلومات أو غيره من الاشخاص الرئيسيين لمصدر المعلومات
The approach serves both as a local test for suitability and adaptation potential as well as for demonstrating an already tested technology.
Once farmers are exposed to the approach, they can apply it on their own initiative. This is possible because of the low costs and technical requirements of the approach.
Experiments are conducted on the basis of farmers' priorities and according to local conditions. This means that farmers develop ownership of the experiments and the derived results.

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؟
Experiments are not carried out in a scientifically rigorous way and therefore only have limited scientific value for evaluating technologies.	if scientific proof is required, farmer-led experiments should be closely supported by technicians (per se not a farmer-led experiment anymore!)
Documentation of the activities and results for wider sharing is often poor and inadequate	clear guidelines are needed for documentation with clear instructions on what, when, and how to record important information. This is necessary so that the results can be more widely used.
In some cases a lack of research equipment for better documentation and observation inhibits better understanding.

7.1 طرق جمع/مصادر المعلومات

7.2 المراجع للمنشورات المتاحة

العنوان، المؤلف، السنة، النظام القياسي الدولي لترقيم الكتب ISBN:

SSMP (2001) Implementation Guideline on Farmer Led Experimentation (in Nepali). Kathmandu: Sustainable Soil Management Programme

متاح من أين؟كم التكلفة؟:

SSMP

العنوان، المؤلف، السنة، النظام القياسي الدولي لترقيم الكتب ISBN:

Paudel, C.L.; Regmi, B.D.; Schulz, S. (2005) - Participatory Innovation Development - Experiences of the Sustainable Soil Management Programme

العنوان، المؤلف، السنة، النظام القياسي الدولي لترقيم الكتب ISBN:

..In Kolff, A.; van Veldhuizen, L.; Wettasinha, C. (eds) Farmer-centred Innovation Development - Experiences and Challenges from South Asia, pp. 109-126. Bern:

متاح من أين؟كم التكلفة؟:

SSMP