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

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

Soil & Water Conservation Office, Ningde Prefecture - China

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

Planting Horsetail Beefwood along seaside to protect cropland from sea wind erosion and typhoon destroy.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Planting Horsetail Beefwood as shelter belts along seaside to prevent Strong wind and water erosion/destroy on the cropland. Horsetail Beefwood is a perennial tree growing in sub-tropic and tropic climate. Its timber can be used in industry and fuel timber. It is easy to maintain and accepted by land users.

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 SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Strong sea wind and typhoon destroy the farmland and the serious erosion makes soil layer thin. The crops are often blown away and yield is decreasing gradually.

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	passive
planning	passive
implementation	interactive	responsibility for major steps
monitoring/ evaluation	external support	interviews/questionnaires;
Research	none

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

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users

Explain:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

Form of training:

• demonstration areas

Form of training:

• farm visits

Subjects covered:

Demonstration in the field.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: Demonstration of planting horsetail beefwood; Key elements: Size between trees, maintain; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: projects own extension structure and agents 2) Advisory service was carried out through: projects own extension structure and agents; Extension staff: mainly government employees 3) Target groups for extension: land users; Activities: Demonstration

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Propaganda, soil conservation, extension and SWC benefits can lure land users to participate in the project.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• no

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

economic / production aspects were regular monitored through measurements
area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

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:

• 2,000-10,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (national): 80.0%; other (-): 20.0%

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)

• agricultural

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

• voluntary

Comments:

It is managed by administrative way, land users' input are mainly voluntary with subsidy paid in cash.

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)?

• yes

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Reducing wind erosion and improving soil fertility so that increasing production and gaining better benefits. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: It is unnecessary to spend much labor & money to maintain since it can produce better benefits and improve environment.)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
improving the ecological environment and economic benefits (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Forbidding disafforest.)

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?
Input from the government is too little, and some land users do not really realize the importance of SWC.	strengthening propaganda of the importance of SWC, to get more funds from different channels.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
no

7.1 Methods/ sources of information