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)

Book project: where the land is greener - Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide (where the land is greener)

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

Centre for Agriculture in the Tropics and Subtropics (Centre for Agriculture in the Tropics and Subtropics) - Germany

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

Université catholique de Louvain (Université catholique de Louvain) - Belgium

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Planning and management of individual and village land, based on land users' participation, with simultaneous promotion of women's activities.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: This approach is integral to the Tahoua Rural Development Project, PDRT (Projet de D??veloppement Rural de Tahoua), a long-term project, which was initiated in 1988 and has been financed mainly through the German and Nigerien governments, but with voluntary participation and contributions from the local population. The main goal of the approach is to plan and implement land management activities with villagers in such a way that sustainability is ensured. The specific objectives of the project are to: (1) increase the capacity of the villagers to design, implement and self-evaluate SWC activities; (2) develop and document management programmes for the village land; (3) restore and protect the agrosilvopastoral production potential; (4) develop and evaluate activities for the benefit of rural women; and (5) improve the capacity of government and private development agencies to coordinate and execute sustainable land rehabilitation. The technical focus of PDRT???s approach is evident in its title. The project emphasises simple and cheap technologies that are replicable. Project extension work is carried out by facilitators and consists of awareness raising, demonstration and exchange trips. Problem identification and planning of activities takes place in village meetings. The local land users are supported by project personnel who also provide technical assistance during the implementation of SWC measures.

Methods: Incentives are provided for the rehabilitation of marginal land for silvo-pastoral use, but nothing is given for individual agricultural land, other than the transport of stones using lorries - for those fields that do not have stones close by. Through village groups and with the help of development agencies, the people of Tahoua district have succeeded in implementing measures to improve living conditions on a sustainable basis. However continuation of the approach is not ensured due to two major reasons: (1) land users do not have the means to carry on the activities on common land and (2) the government lacks the capacity and finance for extension. The project supported services stopped completely in 2003 - however a new programme began in 2004 with German cooperation and is currently attempting to use NGOs for extension work.

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 general objective is to develop a participatory way of developing and implementing simple soil and water conservation measures - and ensuring sustainability by involving local people - with the overall goal of improving the status of the degraded ecosystem and uplifting the living conditions of the rural population.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: - previously the 'beneficiaries' of land rehabilitation programmes did not feel responsible/accountable and therefore were difficult to mobilise for voluntary participation in activities, - there had been no co-ordination and consultation between implementing agencies and organisations, - there was general degradation of the agrosilvo-pastoral ecosystem, and associated low returns from the land

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	public meetings; problem identification in village meetings
planning	interactive	public meetings; self-evaluation of planning in village meetings
implementation	self-mobilization	travail intermittent; auto-encadrement des paysans par des agents d'auto-encadrement du projet: une animatrice, un animateur, un(e) responsable pour le génie rural et de l'environnement
monitoring/ evaluation	none	measurements/observations, public meetings; through field observations (measurement of biomass development on certain sites) and self-evaluation in village meetings
Research	none	on-farm

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Explain:

through village meetings, consultations, and participatory village assessments.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. during planning and training processes.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Form of training:

• hands-on practice

Subjects covered:

Training on the mastery of the various techniques CES: spinning curve of level, realization tassa etc ...

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

Key elements: Project extension work is carried out by facilitators (extension staff), and consists of awareness raising, demonstration and exchange trips. The government extension service is unable to continue the work at the same level due to limited financial means.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, a little

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

• local

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: area of improved land

technical aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: area treated with various technologies

economic / production aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: biomass production, yield of herbs, development of planted trees

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: finances, personnel, logistics, inputs used

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: There have been several changes since 1988. The project was reoriented from a focus merely on productivity towards a natural resources management approach. In 1990, anti-erosion technologies were introduced, and 1993/94 saw the start of a more comprehensive land management approach.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

These include characterisation of SWC measures (with an emphasis on traditional technologies), and analysing problems of food-for-work, amongst other sociological studies. Some of this research was carried out by the project and some studies were carried out by local sociologists. No local research institutions were directly involved.

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• > 1,000,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (national): 10.0%; international non-government (-): 80.0%; local community / land user(s) (-): 10.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

Yes

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• agricultural

• infrastructure

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

• voluntary

Comments:

Labour is mostly voluntary, but partly rewarded with incentives. Food is provided for rehabilitation of marginal land

community infrastructure(incl. Roads&buildings for meetings)

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• no

If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

On common lands, land users will not be able to expand activities because they don't have the means (money, tools, lorries to transport stones, organisation) and they have no access to loans for implementation. However application of certain SWC technologies on individual fields such as planting pits (tassa) or 'half moons' (demi-lunes) continues without any outside support.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Supervision of operators (at least for those chosen)
Improvement of the village infrastructure: tracks, wells (How to sustain / enhance this strength: Continue with project / external support if possible.)
Training from the point of view of technical knowledge
Increased harvests even at abandoned cultivation sites (How to sustain / enhance this strength)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Sensitization of the population for their environment and the importance of the work CES (How to sustain / enhance this strength: continue with awareness)
Training and self-management of the village people (to continue with the training, to include all the groups, to make management schemes for the collective lands claimed)
Valorization of local resources stones; (How to sustain / enhance this strength: simple: operators make and follow improvements every year. Self-assessment is sufficient to discuss weaknesses, achievements and improvements to be made)

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?
The continuation is not certain: there is not a village group that can undertake the functions of the project.	To provide enough training to plan and also by seeking financial support.
Failure to respect the rights of land use resulted in conflicts between culturalists and pastoralists.	The project has exchanged the production center of annual harvests for silvo-pastoral production.
Does not address the exodus of young people	Training of young people: meetings with young people (16-25 years) to give them ideas: - to rent in small groups a field of culture of off season and to cultivate vegetables for the sale - formation of the teams of the specialists CES (expl. Draw lines of contour lines, then use them on the project temporarily and let them do more and more work paid by private (proposal by Pierre Martin, Grenoble University F)

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Winckler H, Hertzler G (1996) Préserver les coutumes, préparer l'avenir. Présentation du PDRT, GTZ, EschbornTielkes E (1998)Communally managed rotational grazing on reclaimed pastures in the northern Sahel

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Tielkes E (1998)Communally managed rotational grazing on reclaimed pastures in the northern Sahel.

Available from where? Costs?

In: Lawrence P, Renard G and von Oppen M (eds) (1999)