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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 557, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'CARITAS (Switzerland) - Switzerland', 'template': 'raw'}

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

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Management and control of the water distribution, maintenance of the infrastructure and water conflict resolution by the locally organized association

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: Under the National land reform of the Republic of Tajikistan, land resources, which used to belong to kolkhozes and sovkhozes, were distributed to individual households. Such division had two consequences, on the one hand, villagers were given opportunity to develop the land privately as an income-generating source, and on the other hand, it intensified the conflicts over water. The government was not capable to solve the disputes over water and manage the water resources sustainably because of lack of finances and lack of staff. A water users association was created with the aim to replace the former Soviet water management system and to ensure systematic and timely distribution of irrigation water and maintenance, as well as to improve the infrastructure.

Methods: This approach involves thee different actors: association members (water users), the association and the government. The association members have to stick to certain conditions in order to join, namely, they have to pay annual membership fees and water taxes fixed by the government. Government, on its turn, ensures uninterrupted supply of the agreed amount of water and the association is responsible for the control and equal water distribution and all related technical works.

Stages of implementation: Steps involved in creation of the water users association.
1) Local leaders met with representatives of Vodhoz (local state agency, regulating water resources) to discuss creation of an independent association with a full mandate over irrigation water management; 2) Leaders organized a general meeting with people of 5 villages in Muminabad district to inform them about the role and importance of establishing a locally based association and discuss conditions for its membership; 3) Charter of the association was developed, 5 leaders representing villages were elected and the amount of a membership fee was agreed upon; 4) The association was registered as a legal entity; 5) Needed amount of water per growing season was calculated and agreed upon; 5) The Leaders (of association?) and Vodvoz concluded an agreement, according to which, Vodhoz is obliged to provide the required amount of water and the association leaders agree to collect the determined fees for water from the water users and to deliver it on time to Vodvoz.


Role of stakeholders: The role of the three main stakeholders (Vodhoz, association and water users) is to follow the rules of the association. There is a strong element of trust among the association and its members.

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

• recent local initiative/ innovative

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (regulation of water distribution, water conservation, conflict resolution)

To establish a responsible body, recognized by the government and accepted by the local people, to manage water related issues and to maintain as well as to improve conditions of the infrastructure in the local level.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The approach is addressing the problem connected with the use of the water resource. Incapability of the government to manage waters on the village level resulted in conflicts over water use, misusage of water and abundance of the infrastructure. This condition had a direct effect to productivity and to food security as a consequence.

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	It was members of the local community, who thought of the idea and they approached the local water agency.
planning	interactive	Local leaders organized the meeting where all interested villagers participated.
implementation	external support	Implementation was entirely through the local community.
monitoring/ evaluation	none
Research	none

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:

• land users alone (self-initiative)

Explain:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• public meetings
• courses

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

No

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, greatly

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

• local

Specify type of support:

• financial
• capacity building/ training
• equipment

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: None

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: None

area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: None

area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: None

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: None

management of Approach aspects were None monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: None

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: None

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

No

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 10,000-100,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international: 80.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc): 10.0%; 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?

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• construction

• infrastructure

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

• paid in cash

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

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

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Water management through such associations is of states' interest as well, and therefore state supports minilar initiatives.
Conflict resolution: Association leaders act as a conflict resolving body and due to their respectful position in the community, they are able to avoid serious conflicts.
Transparency: Association is initiated and regulated by the local leaders, therefore there is much more trust on them among water users.

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?
sometimes it is difficult to collect money from water users.
membership fee is too low and not enough to make significant investment to maintanence of the infrstructure.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information