Local Level Participatory Planning (LLPPA)
(Ethiopia)
Description
LLPPA
Aims / objectives: To enhance people's (community) participation in planning implimentation and evaluation of SWC technologies., Changing farmers attifued towards current ecological concept and enable them to keep there agro-ecological environment by training and awaring them to utilize appropriat SWC technology in their farm and their vicinity, By group formation, At PA level, From planning the sWC technology in an area up to maintenance and stablization.
Location
Location: W/Herergea, Ethiopia
Geo-reference of selected sites
Initiation date: n.a.
Year of termination: 1996
Type of Approach
-
traditional/ indigenous
-
recent local initiative/ innovative
-
project/ programme based
Approach aims and enabling environment
Main aims / objectives of the approach
The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (It increases soil fertility to plant forage on bund.)
Increasment of land productivity.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Scarcity of land, poorness of the country, the consequence of the approach will be seen in the future.
Conditions enabling the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
-
Legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights): The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights helped a little the approach implementation: There is no land use policy
Conditions hindering the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
-
Knowledge about SLM, access to technical support: Do not accepting technical design
Treatment through the SLM Approach: By teaching the farmers.
Participation and roles of stakeholders involved
Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles
What stakeholders / implementing bodies were involved in the Approach? |
Specify stakeholders |
Describe roles of stakeholders |
local land users/ local communities |
|
Working land users were work equally divided between men and women but some activities are difficult to be carried out by women. Make group by consulting with female group. |
Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
none
passive
external support
interactive
self-mobilization
monitoring/ evaluation
measurements/observations;
Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology
Decisions were taken by
-
land users alone (self-initiative)
-
mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists
-
all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach
-
mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users
-
SLM specialists alone
-
politicians/ leaders
Decisions were made based on
-
evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)
-
research findings
-
personal experience and opinions (undocumented)
Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management
The following activities or services have been part of the approach
-
Capacity building/ training
-
Advisory service
-
Institution strengthening (organizational development)
-
Monitoring and evaluation
-
Research
Advisory service
Advisory service was provided
-
on land users' fields
-
at permanent centres
Name of method used for advisory service: T & U System; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: government's existing extension system, Extension staff: mainly government employees
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities
Monitoring and evaluation
bio-physical aspects were monitored through observations
technical aspects were monitored through observations
economic / production aspects were monitored through observations
area treated aspects were monitored through observations
There were many changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: As a result of monitoring and evaluation the bunds are maintainced those can't fit the technical design are re-costructed.
Financing and external material support
Annual budget in USD for the SLM component
-
< 2,000
-
2,000-10,000
-
10,000-100,000
-
100,000-1,000,000
-
> 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: n.a.
The following services or incentives have been provided to land users
-
Financial/ material support provided to land users
-
Subsidies for specific inputs
-
Credit
-
Other incentives or instruments
Financial/ material support provided to land users
partly financed
fully financed
Labour by land users was
-
voluntary
-
food-for-work
-
paid in cash
-
rewarded with other material support
Impact analysis and concluding statements
Impacts of the Approach
No
Yes, little
Yes, moderately
Yes, greatly
Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?
Adopted group working system
Did the Approach improve issues of land tenure/ user rights that hindered implementation of SLM Technologies?
The problem is likely to be overcome in the near future. Because the land use policy may release in the near future.
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
Main motivation of land users to implement SLM
Sustainability of Approach activities
Can the land users sustain what hat been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
Conclusions and lessons learnt
Strengths: land user's view
-
Overcoming shortage of fuel wood and forage
-
Increase productivity
-
Decreasing the time spent for fetching water
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
-
To increase soil fertility (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
-
Reduce runoff (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
-
Increase forage availability (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
-
Increase fuel construction wood (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
-
Increas availability of clean water (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
-
Decreasing cultivated land
Creating awareness
-
Addressing weeds
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
References
Date of documentation: Jan. 21, 2009
Last update: July 24, 2017
Resource persons
-
Philippe Zahner (philippe.zahner@deza.admin.ch) - SLM specialist
Full description in the WOCAT database
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution
- Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (DEZA / COSUDE / DDC / SDC) - Switzerland
Project